Hansen MS Monostrut Hybrid

[Hansen Design]

The Hansen MS-5b Monostrut Hybrid shown following is in the prototype /testing stage. It is one example which demonstrates that Hi-Pro kites need not be ultra flat, complicated or high aspect.

Design Criteria:
Ultra-High Projected Area (86%)
Stability and Predictability (low AR)
High Maneuverability, Power & De-Power
Easy Re-Launch (conventional and reverse)
Simplicity (ILE + 1 strut, 4-line Bar)
Lightweight, easy to pack.
Low Cost

Note:
Commercial inquiries regarding design rights, licensing and production of this kite or others are invited.
Individual inquiries regarding direct purchase will not be answered but will be retained and forwarded to licensees.
Certain aspects of this design are protected by intellectual property rights.

Bill Hansen
Hansen Design
bill@hansenaerosports.com

[Scribbler]

Can we see a vid/photos of it in action?

[Z4 KITER]

With only 1 strut, then I guess One-pump would be overkill - or would only need one connector tube.

[tautologies]

With only 1 strut, then I guess One-pump would be overkill - or would only need one connector tube.

But it's already a two pump

How will the canopy react to extreme depower? Would it flutter a lot leaving the kite unstable?

A.

[BWD]

Looks delta-like. Delta plan is usually good for stability and handling AOA variation well. With that plan and scalloped TE, its flutter should be under control. Looks like it has TE battens too....
Wonder how turning will be with tiny tips but centralized area.... not necessarily bad... interesting....
But what do I know.
At any rate, the simplicity appeals!
Thanks for posting!

[gonewiththewind]

The Hansen MS-5b Monostrut Hybrid shown following is in the prototype /testing stage.

Hey Bill. The kite looks sweet. Reminds me of my first two-line kite ever when I was 12! Only thing I'm curious about is the size. The blueprints say that it is drawn to 100% scale. Are we going to see some youtube video of a kitesurfing squirrel or is this for real kitesurfers like us? Even on my huge monitor, it looks kind of tiny.

Also, be careful... It looks a lot like that kite that BEST has been working on. They're calling it "Jack the RipOff", and they've evidently been developing the prototype for a few years now. I'm sure we'll see photos any day now.

[ScottM]

Hey I'm going to buy some new kites this year...

...don't go making them obsolete!!


... nah design looks really cool.

Actually looks like a proper bat kite!!

[Hansen Design]

The kite looks sweet. Reminds me of my first two-line kite ever when I was 12! Only thing I'm curious about is the size. The blueprints say that it is drawn to 100% scale.

GWTW:
Sorry to be confusing on the scale. The jpg is a screenshot of a small portion of the actual full-size pattern file and obviously not to scale. The kite is actually 9.0sq-m flat / 7.7sq-m projected with 86% PA%. Compare that to the 75% or so PA% of the new 'ultra flat' kites in other threads. You are correct that the planform is reminiscent of some 2-line stunt kites which are quite stable and turn extremely fast. For those mentioning flutter when de-powered, I consider it a mis-statement as backwinding or 'luffing' at low to negative AOA is to be expected unless the foil is rigid which will cause pitching and possible inversion. Hence, the straight struts w/gusset on other recent Hi-Pro kites. IMO, flutter is more appropriately a description of resonant trailing edge flapping rather than backwinding or luffing. I'll post pics as testing progresses but at present, some details are proprietary.

The point of my post is basically to show that ultra Hi-Pro need not be flat, BOW, or complex. The MS Hybrid, to my thinking, is what is left when unnecessary, costly and heavy elements of a kite are removed. That may even include the battens...
- Bill

[edmundc]

Hey Bill,

Looks like an interesting concept you have developed there. Keep up the good work. Looking forward to your test reports.

Keep up the good work.

Edmund

[munteruk]

Bill,
Looking at some of your past designs and this one as well, it seems that you are not concerned if the center of the TE lifts slightly, making the profile more c-shaped at the rear compared to a flatter LE. I would have thought that a parallel LE & TE profile would present less drag but have no substantive evidence. I'd be interested to hear a little more of your design rationale on this topic.

Cheers,
Munteruk.