Ultraflex (was LONGITUDINAL STABILITY OF FLEXIFOIL?)
Subject: Ultraflex (was LONGITUDINAL STABILITY OF FLEXIFOIL?)
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Andrew Beattie)
Date: Fri, 28 May 1993 08:26:40 -1000
In article <email@example.com> firstname.lastname@example.org (Jeffrey C. Burka) writes:
>In article <1993May28.email@example.com> firstname.lastname@example.org (Andrew Beattie) writes:
>[re the Ultraflex]
>>much more expensive
>"Much more expensive"?
Maybe I lied. My UF 10' spar cost me 65 UK pounds (about $100). Now that I
think about it, this is probably in the same ballpark as a standard spar.
>>>In which situation we should use the lightweight spar?
>>1) Low or zero wind
>Actually, the Ultraflex on the 6' model is usuable in winds up to about 15-20.
>Due to the increased flex, the kite is slowed quite noticeably. I know folks
>who compete with the Ultraflex even when the winds are high, just so the
>kite won't be moving as fast.
If it can take the punishment, then this would increase the kite's use for
traction quite considerably. The big drawback with flexies is the massive
max/min power ratio: nothing at the edge, too much at the centre. Lots of flex
should allow you to use a stack that is large enough to provide traction at the
edge of the window without being over-powered in the power zone.
>I don't have the slightest idea what the upper range of the larger sizes of
The label on the spar says 10mph.
>(who, between his Ultraflex and his stock spar, has flown his flexis in
>wind ranging from almost 0 up to 55)
Andrew [who wishes that he could find some 55mph wind :-( ]
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Return to Kite Fliers's Site