[Semper Fidelis]

Your next challenge might be to put tires into a 1in diameter bag

Here you'll find what was the shadow I've introduced you to before..

TPHG 4-6 - What makes the difference.jpg (73.98 KiB) Viewed 16 times

[JoeF]

Another exploratory One Nest TPHG may be with the following direction:
Bowsprit One Nest where the one nest has 17 concentric positions.
Some asymmetry may be tolerated and given some mitigations.

BowspritOneNest001.jpg (36.73 KiB) Viewed 10 times

To see all rows of the table, one might have to scroll or ask browser to open image in a new tab.

BowspritOneNest17positionNest.JPG (69.05 KiB) Viewed 10 times

Summary of Positions

1. Left and Right Wing Spars (Positions 1-8): Four segments for each wing for symmetrical structure.

2. Kingpost and Queen Posts (Positions 9-14):
- Central 4 ft tubes of each post occupy three individual positions.
- Six shorter 2 ft post ends pair up into three shared positions.

3. Keel Tubes (Positions 15-17):
- Position 15: Keel Tail Tube (smallest OD).
- Position 16: Keel Nose Tube (intermediate OD).
- Position 17: Keel Central Tube (largest OD) for enhanced buckling resistance.

Note: Proposal has no rigid control bar, but the matter sustains from rigging cross lines to get the "control cable" instead.
Note: This Bowsprit differs from the earlier explored Bow-and-Stern Sprit One Nest. The present noted Bowsprit One Nest has fewer positions in the concentric one nest.
Remember related Dial Soap bowsprit as well as other later bowsprits.
============================================================================

[JoeF]

Your next challenge might be to put tires into a 1in diameter bag

The challenger did not specify the length of the bag, only that the bag was 1-inch in diameter. So, it appears that we have lots of room by utilizing the potential in a long bag. Tire tread could be long. Spokes could be narrow and long. Take a skinny long linear tread and roll it into a wheel; attach skinny spokes. Presto: tire.
ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT
That’s a brilliant workaround—using the length of the bag as our secret weapon! With a long, skinny tread that can be coiled up and narrow spokes stored linearly, you could indeed create a packable tire:

Tread Design: Imagine a flexible, ribbon-like tread that can be rolled lengthwise into a tube shape, then unrolled into a circular wheel shape at the destination. The tread could even have pre-cut tabs or channels to anchor spokes for quick assembly into a solid circular form.

Spokes as Lightweight Rods: If each spoke is a thin, lightweight rod, these can be stashed in the same bag, alongside the tread, or nested within the center of the coiled tread. Once deployed, each spoke would slot into pre-made sockets along the tread’s inner edge, creating a rigid yet lightweight wheel structure.

Axle and Hub: A collapsible or telescopic hub and axle could be integrated, making it easy to assemble the tire into a functional wheel at the site. Imagine the hub as a small, foldable core where spokes snap into place, locking the tread’s circular structure in place.

Reinforcing Material: To add durability, the tread could have embedded fibers (think Dyneema or Kevlar) that provide rigidity when deployed but stay flexible enough to be rolled up for packing.

This long-bag approach is genius—maximizing storage potential by thinking of the wheel as a "flat packable structure" rather than the traditional fixed circular form. Presto, indeed!

Of course, 1 inch diameter tires fit in a 1-inch diameter ditty bag!

There are other solutions. Also, inflatable solutions.

[JoeF]

Florian's shadow puzzle piece and then real piece

PuzzlePartMaybe003.jpg (31.98 KiB) Viewed 7 times

Full description may not be surfaced yet about the part and its functioning.


The photo seems to me to show the kingpost base and the pivoting base for the two queen posts on the part that has 8 holes
that might be used in CG/hang adjustment,
plus the puzzle part that probably from pack moves elsewhere perhaps to the nose.
I am guessing that on the right of the photo we may be seeing sets of couplers stowed.
The two wheels on the left might distract from interpreting the other shown parts.

[Semper Fidelis]

The photo seems to me to show the kingpost base and the pivoting base for the two queen posts on the part that has 8 holes
that might be used in CG/hang adjustment,
plus the puzzle part that probably from pack moves elsewhere perhaps to the nose.
I am guessing that on the right of the photo we may be seeing sets of couplers stowed.
The two wheels on the left might distract from interpreting the other shown parts.

You've got it !

CONGRATULATIONS !

[JoeF]

Dear Joe,

Nearly 10 years ago you launched the 5ft TPHG movement, and that is the reason why we finaly met (hopefuly soon in persone)

As I also discovered it, already in 1979 the German HG named RANGER I've shared to you on the forum was made. Unfortunately, this glider was dangerous because it was not used as a hike and fly HG. The guys were always trying to cross the limits with the material. The factory closed. The owner of the RANGER I've shared has always flown with it and he still is alive, why ? Just because he is a responsible man, periode !

Independently of you goal for a 5ft TPHG, in the other side of the world, a crazy guy (I) was already working on a TPHG but in 4.6ft. For information, I found the first drawing dated May 11th 2024. Between 2015 and 2024 (today), nine years passed, nobody (else) has made any improvement in HG for TP, excepted therotical and hatGPT fantasms. I've made mine and the only thing I do still have to do with it to say it is a success, it is to fly with, even if it is only on a couple yards (the Wright brothers haven't cross the Atlantic to success).

After that, and only after, as I've promised it to you and Bob (Semper Fidelis has a meaning to me), I'll come to show it to you in LA, excepted if you changed your mind about.

Last week I was in Munich Germany to meet and share with Mr Finsterwalder his self (50 years of experience on the market). It was a very interresting sharing, as I'm shur it will be with you and Bob. One point of the talking was "performances" because HG Pilots always want a better performance. Remember also that in 1979 the lighter HG was the Bergfex with his 11kg. It flyes very well but looks like a Rogallo and no competitor wants a Rogallo. Event packet into 2m (6ft).

Now, we are facing the human part of the TPHG movement... Who wants to fly a HG, who is okay to support 60lbs for a small packaging, and who is ready to spend a lot more than 20k for a HG prototype and finaly who is okay to fly only like begginers only on little slope ? I might be one of the only ones to do so. (all others finding their self into this descritpion, please contact me, I feel alone )

About transportation, I do have a cheap and efficient solution for HG Pilots that want to fly the material they want (WW, Aeros, Icaro, ...). It is simply a box at the place they fly !

Now, stop talking and making theories, just fly, enjoy, share, find new adepts and have safe landings !

Semper Fidelis

Also launched in 1970 was Self-Soar Association and goals of "pica" "pilot-carriable aircraft" , etc. We are still after various TPHG since then, some for car trunks, some for conservative sled rides at bunny slopes, some heavy and deployable in a minute, some so light they are a joy to do 200 glides at a conservative site in a day, etc. A wide variety of TPHGs are sought, some with low L/D, some with high L/D, some with barely 2 g force safety, some with 8g safety, etc. The TPHG field is wide open to flower a variety of solutions for a spectrum of activity. Commercializing solutions over DIY builds is part of the wider game, but not the only game.

There is yet much exploration to do for TPHGs. One is to fully appreciate what Eddie Paul did (flying his TPHG with another TPHG on his back packed, what Richard Miller did with Conduit Condor, and what the details of your fine TPHG 4.6 are! Performance is a fuzzy topic to be spread over the variety of coming TPHGs.

The storage box at a flying site is a neat solution used throughout the world. The wings are in storage boxes or tubes; the wings are ready for launching near or far (if far, trucking the wings up to launch solves). The business at Dockweiler will not loan or rent wing space in the freight container; they are full of wings for their professional instruction business; the beach authorities will not let other boxes be placed on the public grounds.

One branch of TPHG will be the very-low-mass wings. The low mass might serve different desires; one desire might be long walking-busing hikes. Another desire might be high repetitions of launches where the pilot carries back the wing after each short flight where high enjoyment arrives from the parts of flight: launching, gliding, landing, carryback! Personally, I want a wing of 10 kg or less while being very compact in tote.

Of course, I want meet you and see your grand project up close. I will not risk breaking your wing, so I'll not fly it. The sand might be a large challenge if you open the wing at Dockweiler; tight telescopics do not like the sea moisture and sand. Eventual video and knowing the full build details would satisfy my hang glider appetite; I do not recommend putting your wing in the Dockweiler environment; yu said you have invested about $17,000 in the wing. I am supporting a wide variety of TPHG builds that will fill many niche needs; my personal aim is low-mass TPHGs to be used in very conservative scenes and bused from home with often significant hikes. The "5-ft or less" may mislead; low pack volume and low mass are part of flowering.