Fill in panels are a piece of nylon fabrics that "mimics" profile (eg struts are straight). Recently only North is (still?) using them, but were used by few brands in the past. I've used them on few kites but dropped them on new ones completely.
I could talk of ideas/intelectual rights/open source/what's wrong with the world etc for a long time but here it won't get the point. Now, some of the inventors are lucky and go into development and finally to production but some not and their ideas get stucked in the space until later they're maybe found again. To put it simple the credits from me gets the one who did/discover something first and not the one who uses those ideas or wrap them into something "else". I think that this is right if there is any justice in the world. Altho I respect that you have the courage to go into it.
To be perfectly clear I am totaly aware that upgrades of the ideas can be better than originals and I'd rather go kite with new ILE strutless than the old ones.
boardriding maui wrote:herculon - Thanks for the great news! Since I had the scale out, I grabbed the 8 just to see. 4.7 lbs / 2.13 kg. With all the news this week of brands launching strutless designs, if a weight war is waged as a result it will be critical in my opinion for riders to be aware of the huge % of weight that is now the bladder material. I think cutting corners there would be terrible mistake. I see bladder failures as a main contributor to a kite's lifespan and this was a major influence in my motivation to seek a strutless design solution so riders would have less problems with their gear. So, thinner bladder material isn't worth the tradeoff to my thinking.
BWD - I believe your question was regarding warranty, but post has gone down before I've replied. An excellent question. The simple answer is "the standard" one year material and workmanship. The more accurate answer is that my work does not fit the industry "standard". I thought to say that every part of my offering is handled directly by me but this fails to give credit to others that are involved. But from every part of its design to its sale, I take full responsibility. There will be no "Sorry Man, that's just the policy" from any individual without their heart in it. Success for me is measured by every stoked rider, and keeping them stoked. Hope that answers your question, let me know if not.
DrLightWind - Thanks for reposting. Tell me more about "flexible in-fill panels"! Did the material have flex?? If so, what was the result. Sounds fascinating!! For the relaunch, yeah, without even the wingtips up in the air very much + the weight in the canopy + the long flat section in the LE, I was just wondering how that could work. For the invert issue - YIKES! I can't comment on that kite having not been involved in its design, but can say from my own development that I've experienced how critical bridling is to reliable performance.
Gigi;) - I agree that offering an aspect ratio is totally doable. My point was that given the substantial differences in kite designs that this measure is misleading. Years ago, seemed like a standard system of projected area was going to develop for the sport, but that doesn't seem to have happened. I can't imagine a way for this to accurately account for the majority of affect to what the rider experiences anyway. A measure of a kite's cord line at center could maybe be useful information, but then opens the door to wanting camber too. But what good is all that when there's no way to even objectively test for windrange for a design. Its all subjective, and speaking just for myself, I'm cool with that. What is a bummer for me is that my work didn't make your list for "credits & ideas". I agree that development and innovation are to commended, but hoped you'd give me a shout out for the very different level of work and commitment needed to bring a new idea to production. In your defense, I guess the very title of this thread includes "in development". So "production" is off the topic.