Naish mid-season catalog reveals no-strut kite!

[tautologies]

IMHO, the current strutless inflatable configuration is akin to 'painting oneself into a corner.' Certain compromises are required to compensate for the inherent lack of structure. Namely, a highly conical geometry with a tight, low-stretch trailing edge to maintain canopy inflation and flatter foil profiles to reduce luffing/bubbling/flapping. Combined, these attributes create a low AOA / sheeting range with sensitive handling and compromised range / VMG. Added complexity such as LE battens, TE battens, full battens, larger tubes, bridles, ram-air skins, etc. can ameliorate the compromises but when progressively applied also progressively negate the simplicity and low weight / cost. Ultimately, one must accept that (given the present state-of-the-art materials) it is a self-limiting construct. My 2¢...

to BRM for going ahead with it..

No it is not like painting oneself in a corner. I am glad some brands are doing something new and that they dare to go to market with it.
I actually think having this kind of attitude is exactly what painting yourself in a corner looks like. Remember this when you are asked to make one for Switch. I am glad to see you guys finally build a three strut one...maybe someday a two strut or no strut too...huh? (sorry for that little dig).

When you say conical shapes, how do you explain that the Naish and BRM kite looks very different?
When you are talking about battens etc...do you see many of them in the designs just launched?
When you say compromised range...compared to what? The range presented by people that have actually flow them seems huge to me.

This all depends on the design goals. There is no golden standard.
You present this as if not any design is a compromise between many variables. Well it is and you know it.

What really matters is what is the goal of the kite. Does it really matter of it has a few wrinkles when very depowered? It is not like any of the kite shapes are 100% areodynamic anyway.

[Hansen Design]

Hi Taut:
I'm all for innovation - always have been. My post is simply an objective analysis of the compromises required and not brand specific nor expressing an attitude. The points I made are not only obvious when viewing the kites but also beginning to show up in the reports from the users. That said, it remains strictly MHO and I stand by it...
Cheers!

[tautologies]

Hi Taut:
I'm all for innovation - always have been. My post is simply an objective analysis of the compromises required and not brand specific nor expressing an attitude. The points I made are not only obvious when viewing the kites but also beginning to show up in the reports from the users. That said, it remains strictly MHO and I stand by it...
Cheers!

fair enough

edit:
...if you change it to SUBJECTIVE.

[Aummm]

nobody wants you to know that limitation and boosting performance
it's not a performance kite with limited range like 10 years ago or you wanna go back in time, or unless you're a beginner
and you don't know better what is performance or maybe stoke about the fluttering vibration in mid & high range

I agree with Bill and the truth will prevail

I mentioned earlier we were testing them and we shoved it back to the brand for stabilizing the canopy because:
* the trailing flutter and the vibration is unacceptable at the bar
* the range is limited only about 5 miles for the 18m and had a power of a 12m kite. The 10m was a little better...
* bar pressure is unacceptable when it's in middle and high range which is not converted to usable pulling power.
Although it creates an illusion it has a lot of power at the bar, so boostings are noticeable less than similar kites with struts.

People who flown these strutless and have experience with them they can't be fooled,
Pimping them and be honest about it

[BWD]

If I flew an envy prototype, and no other 3 strut kite
how much weight would my comments carry,
if I told you about all the qualities of the rpm, catalyst, and vector?
From the comments, I wonder if the strutless kites tested in the caribbean had too much of a delta shape? I know some french delta purveyors have been skulking about the caribbean lately...
In the end I expect each kite will have its own characteristics, and have different ways of addressing design compromises. Hopefully with success.

[tautologies]

nobody wants you to know that limitation and boosting performance
it's not a performance kite with limited range like 10 years ago or you wanna go back in time, or unless you're a beginner
and you don't know better what is performance or maybe stoke about the fluttering vibration in mid & high range

I agree with Bill and the truth will prevail

I mentioned earlier we were testing them and we shoved it back to the brand for stabilizing the canopy because:
* the trailing flutter and the vibration is unacceptable at the bar
* the range is limited only about 5 miles for the 18m and had a power of a 12m kite. The 10m was a little better...
* bar pressure is unacceptable when it's in middle and high range which is not converted to usable pulling power.
Although it creates an illusion it has a lot of power at the bar, so boostings are noticeable less than similar kites with struts.

People who flown these strutless and have experience with them they can't be fooled,
Pimping them and be honest about it

When you say you were testing "them"...what exactly are you talking about? You make it sound like you have tested both the brm and the trip...but I don't think you have ridden either...

...so which one did you ride? For how long? What is your skill level?

[Gigi;)]

@ tautologies - I'm talking only for the stuff I've already went thru.

@ bill - Kudos +1 you are correct - most of the people don't know but you have to make various compromises to the kite (type). Even the thing like thinner/thicker strut has its meaning in the design (not talking about the weight).

I'm not keen of battens and depending on the goal I'd go w/o them where possible/applicable but if they help you to achieve the goal better like in strutless they are ok plus they are still lighter and not any harder to implement on the kite (actually its even easier than making struts!).

IMHO, the current strutless inflatable configuration is akin to 'painting oneself into a corner.' Certain compromises are required to compensate for the inherent lack of structure. Namely, a highly conical geometry with a tight, low-stretch trailing edge to maintain canopy inflation and flatter foil profiles to reduce luffing/bubbling/flapping. Combined, these attributes create a low AOA / sheeting range with sensitive handling and compromised range / VMG. Added complexity such as LE battens, TE battens, full battens, larger tubes, bridles, ram-air skins, etc. can ameliorate the compromises but when progressively applied also progressively negate the simplicity and low weight / cost. Ultimately, one must accept that (given the present state-of-the-art materials) it is a self-limiting construct. My 2¢...

to BRM for going ahead with it..

[tautologies]

@ tautologies - I'm talking only for the stuff I've already went thru.

@ bill - Kudos +1 you are correct - most of the people don't know but you have to make various compromises to the kite (type). Even the thing like thinner/thicker strut has its meaning in the design (not talking about the weight).

Wait are you also posting as Aumm?

I completely agree that there are tradeoffs in design. My point is the choices one make when considering tradeoffs depends on the design goals. There are some HUGE advantages to making a lighter kite and different desgns can and should have different goals. I respect all the stuff that you guys have done, but wait until you have actually flown the kites before saying what works. As in any kind of research when your selection is limited you have no basis for a generalized conclusion. You can base your conclusion on your experience with your design. That is it.

Like BWD is saying how does having flown a different kite really apply to any of these? I am not even sure Bill has even seen the BRM nor the Naish. It is a stretch to start talking about the kites if that is the case. One can talk about designs in general, but do not make it look like tradeoffs are not affecting all kite designs...

I have flown the Ride extensively. Park even more so...The canopies are tight as hell. The switch 3 strut only came out with a 3 strut I think less than a year ago. I am willing to bet that the industry will more towards lighter shapes. Instead of adding shit, just allow the canopy to breathe. If it is well designed the canopy will be tight. However saying that the BRM 17 is limited to 5 knots windrange without having flown the kite seems odd to me. Especially since people on that thread already state they can fly it in 20 knots.

I do not mean to be aggressive about this, but you guys are talking about kites you have not seen or flown. Even if you probably do know more than most kiters about shapes, you still have not seen these kites. I think discounting them before you have actual experience is a mistake.

[Aummm]

When you say you were testing "them"...what exactly are you talking about? You make it sound like you have tested both the brm and the trip...but I don't think you have ridden either...
...so which one did you ride? For how long? What is your skill level?

You're correct sir we were testing 2 from BrunAile the 18m & 12m and the 17m brm recently traveling through west coast of Florida returning from the islands.
We even compared the BrunAile to put the 17m brm over it which was 2 inches smaller all around to conclude with a 2.5 hrs test fly.
Obviously since we had many hours testing the BrunAile in 2 weeks test flying at 4 different islands with our expert level since we're not a pro or team rider and just artists doing it for fun.
You don't have to believe we have ridden either, but I know what I know and it is sad people are trying to cover the weakness of the kite.
We gave it to many people to try and generally beginners like it in light winds because of the easy handling and launching, but intermediates up people wouldn't spend the money on them because of the diminished performance and chopper noise.
I'm surprised PMU hasn't been responding to this cover up paintings yet

@ tautologies - I'm talking only for the stuff I've already went thru.

Wait are you also posting as Aumm?

He is Not I'm posting as Aummm and Gigi is completely a different user HaHaha

However saying that the BRM 17 is limited to 5 knots windrange without having flown the kite seems odd to me. Especially since people on that thread already state they can fly it in 20 knots.

From 11.5 knots starts to be ridiculous and at 15 knots sounds like a fu*ken chopper is collided when you pull transitions and loops
and from 16 kn you'll be tea-bagged meanwhile the bar is shaking even the sh!t out of you

I do not mean to be aggressive about this, but you guys are talking about kites you have not seen or flown.

If you're not aggressive about it than why don't you tell the truth about it and
why don't you show a picture it's capable to boost and going upwind as other similar L.E.I. kites

[tautologies]

I am not sure what BrunAile is? It seems you have had a few hours on that, and less on the BRM? And no time on the Trip? Is that correct? Just making sure we're on the same page so you said you rode the BRM for 2.5 hours?

Just to make sure:
I have nothing to prove. I am not out to prove anything. I have made no claims what so ever on jumping etc..simply because I have not tried jumping it except off a few wave strapless and it that felt good to me.

Now I would say posting a video of me jumping a kite would prove nothing except my kookness of kookdom if you will. There are many kiters a lot better at jumping than me. I have not claimed anything about jumping ability.

What I have done is said the following:
I believe in the concept. I like the idea of a light design..especially for wave riding.
I believe the kites have pretty good range. I have not really tested this, but given other reports...
I believe the kite I have ridden the (8) will work well for me in waves.
I have also stated:Different designs are a result of different design goals. There is no gold standard. Considering canopy noise as a design flaw is nonsense..it is a design choice. I do not want an armed car or fixed wing.
and finally: I do not believe in judging one kite by testing others. I actually think you have to ride a kite to be able to say anything detailed about it.

I think a little canopy noise is irrelevant if the benefits outweight it. I really see this is a very exciting development for kiteboarding. Surely the kites will evolve further, but I am exited about it.

Now if you call that pimping I am not sure how to respond.