|
I hear the darndest things
sometimes.
One frequent misconception
regards paramotor harnesses. Its a shame when over zealous sellers
sucker people in to misinformation. Sometimes it's just a lack of
understanding, but regardless, if you ever hear "this is the only _____,
everything else is crap" run away—you're being fed a line.
A quick refresher. PPG harnesses can be defined by their attachments:
high, low and mid. Free flight rigs (no motor) nearly all have low
attachments.
There's less difference than
meets the eye. Look at the machines in flight and you'll find
they vary by only about 12 inches. One significant reason is that many
low attachment systems have short pieces of webbing that the carabiner
hooks to (see the picture at right). It does not increase stability—it
merely positions the risers up at a more comfortable location.
-
High hook-ins are
where the risers attach above the shoulders—usually near or above eye
level. Examples include the Miniplane, Blackhawk, SD, Fresh Breeze,
La Mouette, Paracruiser, Paramotor, Sky Cruiser, and similar. Some
of these models offer optional articulating arms for weight shift.
Machines like the Standard Miniplane, Blackhawk, Sky Cruiser and Paracruiser attach on the
harness rather than J-bars. Sitting on the ground their attachments
look lower. But once in flight they're identical height to the J-bar
machines.
-
Low hook-ins have
the attachments down near the pilot/motor's center of gravity. That
allows for good weight shift at the expense of wobbliness in flight.
These include the Pap, Airfer, Free Spirit (in its default
configuration), HE, Vortex and Fly Products low attachment option.
The carabiners attach to a frame hard, almost always articulating arms, to improve weight shift.
One machine (so far), the
Miniplane WS, has
a low attachment system that eliminates the fore/aft wobbliness
while maintaining good weight shift. That's done by raising both the
carabiner attachment and swinging arm pivot point.
-
Mid hook-ins
attach somewhat low but still a few inches above the pilot/motor
center of gravity which reduces in-flight wobbliness but also
reduces weight shift. These include the Walkerjet, FlatTop and lower attachment Bailey units. None of these machines use pivoting
arms, further reducing weight shift—an effort to provide low
attachment points while reducing in-flight movement during
turbulence.
Myth 1:
Low hook-ins are only for advanced pilots.
Its true that most PPG
instructors find students learn quicker on high attachment machines.
However, once the basics of inflation are learned, the success rate
seems to be the same. A few instructors teach quite successfully on low
attachment machines.
In some European countries,
many schools teach exclusively on low attachment machines. It might be
that, in Europe, free flight is far more widespread and so pilots are
frequently adding power instead of starting with power from scratch.
Myth 2:
High hook-ins are for beginners.
Some of the most experienced
pilots in the country fly high hook-ins. It's a matter of personal
preference more than anything else. I've flown all three types a fair
amount find no difference whatsoever in my ability to fly precisely or steeply.
Myth 3:
Low hook-ins are dangerous.
Each system has its own
issues. On many low hook-in machines the brake toggles get close to the cage during
launch and are more susceptible to being sucked in to the prop. However,
high hook-ins seem to have more occasion for excessive-brake pull type
mishaps—possibly because the pilot has more brake authority.
Low hook-ins do tend to lean back in flight which can aggravate torque
effects, especially during launch. A high hook-in machine can have the
same problem if the harness is misadjusted, but it's far more likely on
a low. I've not seen any trend or statistics that suggests low hook-in
machines are any more dangerous. Myth 4:
Advanced pilots use low hook-in machines
Poppycock!
The best Cloverleaf time recorded in the U.S. was turned on a high
hook-in SD by Eric Dufour. The top three finishers at the 2006 U.S.
competition flew high hook-in machines. It's about skill, not equipment. The top 3 winners
in the 2006 English Nationals flew mid hook-in Baileys. No articulating
arms, minimal weight shift, just pilot skill.
Skilled pilots fly the wing
and it really doesn't matter what's pushing them.
Myth 5:
High attachments get rid of torque
More poppycock. Check out the
PPG Bible for what causes "torque turns". There are significant reasons
besides torque.
High hook-in machines can
reduce turning effects by virtue of allowing the pilot to liftoff with a
more vertical propeller plane. But if a high-attachment machine is setup
to be angled back, or the thrust line is offset, it will torque just as
much as a low attachment unit.
Myth 6:
High attachments don't allow weight shift
Go read the reviews. When I
do a paramotor test I measure how far the risers move differentially—that's the
whole goal of weight shift (riser shift is a better term). Give me a
pully equipped weight shift system on a Blackhawk or a Fresh
Breeze with the Wingman harness and I'll get nearly the same riser shift that's possible on a Pap.
It's all about the technique and it takes some effort to master on any
machine. When I first started
flying low hook-in machines I couldn't get as much weight shift as my
Sky Cruiser with moving arms. Then I flew with the Airfer manufacturer
and saw how he did it. Ahhaaa! Then I could, indeed, get a lot of weight
shift although that turned out to be about the same as my machine.
Myth 7:
One articulating bar machine is as good as another.
You would be surprised at
what a few inches can do.
When Sky Cruiser came out
with pivoting weight shift bars hinged on the frame uprights it wasn't
very effective. In fact, it was less effective than the add-on system
which was hinged 2 inches aft by nature of its add-in.
Then I saw
the Arnon Lufi's Vortex paramotor in 2004 and noticed how they went to the
trouble of hinging its articulating bars aft about 2 inches. Voila.
Later,
I noticed Pap did the same thing (Vortex, no doubt, copied Pap).
That's why the add-on system worked better.
There are other placements and settings that can vary the amount of
available weight shift dramatically such as chest webbing tightness,
limiting straps and where the bar hinges on the frame vertically. Weight
shift will be reduced if the pivoting bar is angled upwards in flight
Not all weight shift machines are created equal and sometimes subtle
differences have a big impact. Talk with an experienced pilot or, if the
machine has been reviewed, read about it here. |
Preliminary artwork for an upcoming magazine article describing the
reasoning behind various harness design elements.
You can see the difference between attachment point
and pivot point. Other articles address the difference more thoroughly
but the basic difference is that pivot point is what stability is based
on whereas attachment point determines brake position. Of course brake
toggle height can be adjusted and many wings have multiple brake pulleys
that can be used to help in this regard.
High Hook In Variance
The three machines below are all high hook-ins
although the riser bottom varies by a few inches. Top to bottom:
Blackhawk, Fresh Breeze with comfort bars, SD.
 |
