[JoeF]

UnSafeScene001b.JPG (13.78 KiB) Viewed 5972 times

UnSafeScene001.JPG (21.98 KiB) Viewed 5972 times

Discuss what may be unsafe in this scene. Anyone?

Start: The wing runner is hooked in.
Fairly level grass field with small two wheels on basebar:
What could go wrong?
Consider various types of stumbles.
Consider various types of movement terminations.
== Hesitant self-braking
== Stumble and fall and gouge to rapid stopping of basebar and swing-through to hit head on keel? Do we know for sure that the nose cannot severe tissues of the neck/back?
Consider various ways the small wheels may gouge or hole in the turf.
Consider various positions that hands may be placed; consider each relative to the types of terminations possible.
How vulnerable is the neck?
Are there pilot-limit lines relative to swing-head-into-keel?
What might gusts do relative to beaking?
?
Is an "expert" exempt from all the possible mishaps of the scene?

Different scene, but with some similarities: Video title: Hang Glider Whack Incident - Don't Do This:

Comment: The video shows first "That's The Way You Do It !! "

QuestioningThatIsTheWay.JPG (23.18 KiB) Viewed 5972 times

HOWEVER, question that statement; just maybe even experts ought not be flying with small wheels or bare basebars without a means to bring out splat spoons or splat rollers or splat skis. Comprehensively spell out the many different things that might occur unplanned that would make bad having bare basebar or small wheels; then consider if an "expert" is to have helpful solutions; and what might such solutions bed? Did the gopher just have a go at the turf? Sporadic buried stone or pipe? Lawn not mowed? Outlanding to unknown soil textures? Fainting? Error? Wrong reaction to gust? Soil upheaval? Downburst? Etc. Does the pilot have a "dependency" on the small wheels?

http://www.energykitesystems.net/WHGA/S ... ht1913.jpg
Whack no more? Never whack or beak? Never again?

Examine the advanced rigs and ways in this video and mull over potential landing mishaps when depending on a rig with small wheels or even wheels .....
Consider skids, spoons, sleds ... and more. One sudden stop could be one too many.
Hang Gliding Lanzarote 2014

[JoeF]

LoopLongWheel.png (13.46 KiB) Viewed 5967 times

Loop Long Wheel
Float-combination option

[JoeF]

Limit Lines
Start:

LimitLines001.png (9.01 KiB) Viewed 5966 times

[Bob Kuczewski]

Loop Long Wheel

If I'm understanding this one, it might be hard to grasp the base tube for steering. But it might work well for wing running where the pilot controls via the downtubes throughout the flight.

[JoeF]

BobK,
My note on Loop Long Wheel was probably inadequate. The sketch on Loop Long Wheel is mainly about a different kind of wheel or different kind of ski or different kind of float; all in one; think army tank traction tread without those internal wheels but just a Teflon sliding surface as we are not driving the belt but letting the belt move with some friction that will brake motion finally or conveyor belt; the drawing does not get into details of the down tubes; the long part of the drawing is showing a side elevation for the long part; the frontal cut section view shows suggestion on how to grab the core by leg without disturbing the ability of the conveyor to loop around its core as contact with soils are made. Shown was the side view; what was not noted was that I was continuing the Joy Frame four-leg frame that HAS NO BASETUBE. The above diagram shows side view and showing the ski; no basebar or basetube is involved in the structure. The pilot has in front two legs of two drawing up ... ability for a lateral short hand-hold horizontal sector of the front legs which mimics what you might be wanting as basebar; so control is by holding a vertical section of the front two legs or the short horizontal hand-hold sections. The four legs of the pyramidal cockpit are longer than the triangle control frame that we have as iconic; that is, the down-tube method that iconically holds a basebar is not what is occurring. No basebar. No structure across from left to right in the pilot-body space. The tension that is in a traditional basebar is not there; the duty of such will be taken up by compression at the surface of the the wing spar as the legs marry into the surface of the wing spar. Thanks for the clarification wrestle.

No basebar involved. But notice the sector of the front two legs where a horizontal short section is supplied for hand hold during launch, running, or flight; but vertical upper part of down tube may be used according to standard custom.

Front view; pilot facing viewer.
No standard basebar. Wing is not shown. Rear two legs are not shown. Pilot would be in center of the shown frame.

No standard basebar. Not seen are the farside two legs that match projection into the side view; there are four legs to the recent Joy Frame exploration. At the left of the drawing is the ski nose that curves up; that left side of the side view is suggestive of movement going into the wind. Run or fly into the left side of the drawing. The Limit Lines restrain the pilot's body from going too far forward (toward the left of the drasing).

The long item in side view is the foot, say of the forward left leg and rear left leg. (repeat for right assembly) There is no basebar involved.

Following is only suggestive, as we are not driving the loop belt, but rather just letting the loop belt move or "roll" around a core:

~ JoeF

[JoeF]

Correction of comment by me in post above:
Depending on the version of Joy Frame, the tension normally found in basebars in flight load, because there is no basebar, the tension is taken either by compression or tension in the leg marriage to the wing spar. When the Joy Frame is the more simple, then the marriage at spar will be a tension to match what is flight load in tradition basebar; for the higher version hour-glass frames, the equivalent of tension in traditional basebar will be stayed by compression in the marriage of the upper legs to the wing spar. Splay of the feet of Joy Frame and/or flying wires in positive flight load would give tension to a traditional basebar.
~ JoeF

[JoeF]

REDESIGNING SANTA'S SLEIGH FOR AERODYNAMIC EFFICIENCY
Santa's Sleigh
has some Safe-Splat features
evolving yet ... ImagesMany: http://tinyurl.com/SantasSleigh

[JoeF]

Joy Frame
Note: I am considering just how springy will be the rear two legs. The non-straight pre-form will allow careful specification of the amount of bending that will occur when extra impact load is placed on the rear section of the skid or ski or float or combo impact device which may be called the feet of the Joy Frame.

[JoeF]

Pole vault poles use special tech

Pole fails?

Consider way to keep pieces together even when catastrophic fail occurs.
After each use of a pole, how much life is left in the pole for purpose?
Will some of the pole tech be used in some versions of Joy Frame ?

"The Skypole Carbon is the pole many vaulters have been waiting for." ...
"Integration of carbon and S-glass design creates the lightest carry weight Skypole ever!"
http://www.gillathletics.com/store/prod ... lting-pole

[JoeF]

Joy Frame
...
version notes:
1. Each leg of two parts that telescope and hold spring inside.
2. Ski format: Inverted T cross section.

---------------------------------------
Preamble: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inanna
Early wing runner? Inanna ? She signed her name ...

Inanna.JPG (78.37 KiB) Viewed 5905 times

IdentifyYet.JPG (44.94 KiB) Viewed 5905 times