the Hawk from Pansh

[Bille]

...

I've ordered a few Pansh kites. I've had it take 2 months, but the most recent kite I ordered showed up in about a week. I think they changed and started shipping through Fedex. I'm in the USA for reference.

USA Las Vegas also ; thanks for the refference , and will let you
know how long it takes for mine !

...

if it is for TT why not ; if for hydrofoil, I am affraid Hawk is not really performant under 12-15 knots ...

I do not know for the delivery time, no info from Pansh , neither any email confirming my order ... just see that I have a pending order in my profile.
...

Yes TT and directional ; wind is usually Not a problem, where I live.

Bille

[Kiter_from_Germany]

Hallo together,
after long time (Sold my A15's in between, after clearance project of my cellar),
I'm curious about the HAWK again.
Does some of you know if HAWK has UL or Standard canopy (in nomenclature of pansh) , or Standard bridle (every line sleeved with bad stitching) or UL type (bridle is completely in one piece, no sleeves other than at the ends)?
Greets

[Regis-de-giens]

Standard cloth, not UL. Kite is however quite light according to Funalex (about 1.9 kg for a 12m) because of limited internal structure

[Regis-de-giens]

My first test this summer, with the 8m on hydrofoil, very irregular wind:

[kitexpert]

Pretty simple low AR foil kite. One sided D-ribs are a thing I had in some of my plans long time ago and it is not at all a bad idea. Shape and cell count of Hawk are conservative, not at all aiming to high performance but mellow and easy to use kite.

Bridle configuration is clumsy but that is what we are used to with Pansh kites. This doesn't mean kite flies bad but it means there is excessive amount of line and some of those lines are prone to get out of tune faster than they should. Of course you can ask if also bridle spacing, air intake positions and inner structure are less than optimal but there is many ways to do these things. Better and worse.

Main speciality of this kite is of course the speed system. However it is very questionable if smaller sizes benefit at all from it. Actually it is more probable they suffer because 1:2:4 mixer already offers more than enough AoA range with a usual bar stroke. increasing that doesn't make that much sense because it can lead to twitchy behavior, back stalling etc.

For bigger sizes turbo mixers can be useful. And when you see kite is offered with a huge 57cm bar you possibly can read something between the lines how fast it turns Any help may be very much needed. Higher ratio in the mixer of course makes bar pressure harder which can be a nuisance in biggest sizes.

Counting increased depower rates like Regis has done is mostly if not all nonsense. It is not quite that simple in practice

Judging from the pictures and general design this kite makes a positive appearance. But comparisons to kites like Soul or Edge are inappropriate or just funny, perhaps excluding smallest sizes which usually are usable in all kites

[merl]

However it is very questionable if smaller sizes benefit at all from it. Actually it is more probable they suffer because 1:2:4 mixer already offers more than enough AoA range with a usual bar stroke. increasing that doesn't make that much sense because it can lead to twitchy behavior, back stalling etc.

I was similarly sceptical about this mixer for the small sizes, but having actually tried it I can say that it is not a problem, even if it is maybe not needed (But I plan to experiment with removing the turbo pulley at some point - it is a simple change). Specifically I am talking about the the 4m (in 20-26 knots, on freeride hydrofoil, 90+kg rider). It is neither too high bar pressure (measured by how easy it is to steer with one hand), and not particularly on-off twitchy. With a slight lengthening of B and C in the mixer and there are no backstall issues. I can compare this kite for hydrofoil to the concept air wave 4.5m and the peak 3m where it has a similar bottom end. It has less bar pressure than the CA wave (which is too high because of the simple ABC 2:1 mixer) , and less backstall than the peak 3m, which I believe is quite technical to use. It is not as lively or fun as either, but a stable and smooth kite for an amazing price (around $200).

[Regis-de-giens]

Fully agree.
I tested it with a normal mixer. By just adding a small line in the mixer that engages the pulley later on. I can set it easily to swap from :
(A)-original mixer
(B)- or standard mixer
(C)- or amix of the two= original mixer on 50 % f bar stroke and standard mixer on remaining 50% bar stroke.

I tested the 3 config. And finally prefer the (A): original with pulley. Then the (C) for people wanting low pressure . I was guessing (B) would be a good compromise, but not actually...

I talk for the 8m . More generally, the hawk designer confessed me that first versions and cideos were done with standard mixer then, after having tried the pulley mixer, it is more fun keeping this pulley mixer.

[merl]

By just adding a small line in the mixer that engages the pulley later on.

OK, nice puzzle! Work out Regis's small line. (Without the mixer in my hand I can't immediately see how to do this - but I am only a yellow belt in mixology)

[merl]

By just adding a small line in the mixer that engages the pulley later on.

OK, nice puzzle! Work out Regis's small line. (Without the mixer in my hand I can't immediately see how to do this - but I am only a yellow belt in mixology)

Ah - I was maybe trying to solve a harder puzzle: standard mixer on the first 50% of sheeting and original hawk mixer on the remaining 50%. Regis's solution is not so hard I think.

[Regis-de-giens]

Indeed, not hard work. Just add a line between the Z and the yz1. If line is short (15cm in my memory), mixer is locked like standard.
If line is longer (say 40 cm to be confirmed), it is 50% original 50% pulley.
If line is very long, 100 % pulley