Date: Wed, 5 Oct 1994 05:54:45 -1000 From: mgraves@leadingedg.win.net (Michael Graves) Message-Id: <1161@leadingedg.win.net> Subject: Defining radical A couple weeks ago someone asked me if stunt kite X, which was one I've had for a couple of years, was a "radical" kite. I had to pause and consider this. At the time I bought it I thought it was an amazingly radical kite, now I'n not so sure, though it's still a great kite. All of this begs me to question how we define radical? What does it mean to you? What kites, past and present, exhibit this performance level? Michael Graves = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Date: Wed, 5 Oct 1994 07:27:49 -1000 From: Adrian Pierorazio Message-Id: Organization: Queen's University, Kingston Subject: Re: Defining radical On Wed, 5 Oct 1994, Michael Graves wrote: > A couple weeks ago someone asked me if stunt kite X, which was one > I've had for a couple of years, was a "radical" kite. I had to > pause and consider this. At the time I bought it I thought it was an > amazingly radical kite, now I'n not so sure, though it's still a > great kite. > > All of this begs me to question how we define radical? What does > it mean to you? What kites, past and present, exhibit this > performance level? My first reaction is to note the Benson High Profile. This 'orange slice' shaped kite had and EXTREMELY cambered leading edge, three stand-outs per side and VERY light rods. Washout on the wingtips is enough to be able to do launches from the normally impossible belly down position (lines UNDER the kite!). This kite spins roughly at its geometric centre at rates that can only be described as "ridiculous", making a chorus of jet engine noises the whole time. The primary problem I had with this showboat kite was the expense of keeping it flying! The Beman superlight rods (longer than normally available) combined with the extreme curvature of the leading edge, led to near failure level loading BEFORE the addition of wind. My facination with the superb 'rolling around on the ground' ability of the kite and a couple of mis-timed pull-outs from spins led to exploding rods nearly every time I flew it (special order rods no less!). OOoodles of fun. VERY radical. VERY distinctive kite. Probably the most EXTREME kite in every sense but precision that I've ever flown. Adrian Pierorazio Trainer of Petri the Bungee-Jumping Bear ("I flew?" "No, you falled!") = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Date: Wed, 5 Oct 1994 08:43:42 -1000 From: jburka@Glue.umd.edu (Jeffrey C. Burka) Message-Id: <36us4u$dq9@geog40.umd.edu> Organization: Project Glue, University of Maryland, College Park Subject: Re: Defining radical In article <1161@leadingedg.win.net>, Michael Graves wrote: >All of this begs me to question how we define radical? What does >it mean to you? What kites, past and present, exhibit this >performance level? As you've already noted, defining a kite as radical depends on when you're describing the kite. When the Spin-Off was released, it was the radical version of the Hawaiian. Imagine: it could spin on a wing tip!! I think a lot of advances in stunt kites have been in the creation of kites that could exhibit radical behavior and yet still be extremely predictable, if not down right stable. I think a lot of people would define oversteer as a necessary feature of a radical kite. I disagree. Rather, I'd probably use two other features to describe a kite as radical. The first is the ability to turn well inside the wing tip, along the leading edge. Many equate that ability with oversteer, but a kite like the Tracer is proof that the one does not require the other. The other ability is dumping air/stalling. Many of the current crop of tricks rely on getting the kite to dump the air from it's sail, including axels, tip stabs, power dives resulting in landings, and so forth. Current kites I'd describe as radical? How about: the Luna Moth, the Pro, the Ultra, the Tracer, the Katana, the Tek III (what's the IV like?), etc. There are a number of other kites which dump air very well but don't turn all too tightly (how about the Freestyle?). Are they radical? Maybe. All of the above should, of course, be taken with a grain of salt. A kite is radical if the flyer does radical things with it. Being able to do radical things often involves being imaginative and/or having an idea of what other people are doing. The first time I flew a Luna Moth (a kite which I absolutely love), I was experimenting with it's great ability to axel, skate, and generally stop dead in the air (leads to some neat landings too...). The fellow who owned the kite just sort of stared and said, "I didn't know this kite could do that." Clearly he hadn't been flying it as a radical, yet I've put it in that category. Likewise, I wouldn't consider the X-1 to be a particularly radical kite, yet I do some fairly radical tricks with it. Jeff -- |Jeffrey C. Burka | Pithy, insightful quote to be inserted | | | when one occurs to me. *If* one occurs | |jeffy@eng.umd.edu | to me. | = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Date: Thu, 6 Oct 1994 05:06:04 -1000 From: dquad@aol.com (DQuad) Message-Id: <3713os$4r2@newsbf01.news.aol.com> Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Subject: Re: Defining radical In article <1161@leadingedg.win.net>, mgraves@leadingedg.win.net (Michael Graves) writes: Definig radical? As Forrest sez " Radical is as Radical does" Jeffy hit it on the head. Oww. Maybe the flier defines how radically a kite flies from the norm. There is suppossed to be someting attached to the other end of the lines. Some types of kites lend themselves to being more 'radical', but they are not the only ones that can be flown that way. Marty Sasaki's Big Katana Team kite, for example, is predictable, but can be made to do axels, Stalls slides, Stabs etc. So radical can be defined as they way a kite is flown rather than the way it flies?Maybe? Existential enough? oxo. Dave Arnold = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =