What are these? Canopy Warts?

[JohnRich 4]

What the heck are these little tubes on top of the end cells of this canopy? (See the attached photo.)

[bmcd308 0]

Ask Beezy.

----------------------------------
www.jumpelvis.com

[nicknitro71 0]

http://www.precision.aero/nitron.htm

http://www.hiperusa.com/nitro.html

Memento Audere Semper

903

[jdfreefly 1]

That is what marketing people call a gimmick.

It is a useless thing that is advertised to make people believe they need that product.

Methane Freefly - got stink?

[piisfish 140]

In my novice opinion they are not gimmicks...

These stabilisers reduce the wingtip vortices and therefore allow a slower stall speed.

They are alsoo commonly used by Advance Paragliders.

edited to put correct link

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[hooligan 0]

i like to call them line-over keepers

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

That is what marketing people call a gimmick.

It is a useless thing that is advertised to make people believe they need that product.

I take it that is just your opinion? The engineers designing high speed airplane wings and NASA think they might serve a purpose.

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

The engineers designing high speed airplane wings and NASA think they might serve a purpose.

Canopies don't go that fast yet, do you really think that at the speeds reached even on a full speed approach at a higher then normal wingloading (3.0-ish:1) that it would make a difference?

I don't doubt they make a difference in aircraft applications, I really think that all they do for current design canopies is increase drag.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

That is what marketing people call a gimmick.

It is a useless thing that is advertised to make people believe they need that product.

The above is what people call an "opinion", and it's a pretty poor one at that.


From my experience (and I've test jumped ALOT of canopies) they do indeed make a difference in how the canopy flies. They definately improve slow speed handling and stall caracheristics without slowing the natural speed of the canopy in flight or a dive much at all if any.

Do a search....

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

The above is what people cal an "opinion", and it's a pretty poor one at that.

Granted, but if they made that much of a difference you don't think other manufacturers would follow suit?

Maybe they make a difference, maybe they don't. My moneys on "doubt it" though.

It'd be nice if someone like John Leblanc or an actual canopy manufacturer (someone involved in the aerodynamic side of it) stepped in with some info on these (I'm sure they've all researched them)

Blues,
Ian
Blues,
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Granted, but if they made that much of a difference you don't think other manufacturers would follow suit?

A) at least one manufacturer did. Precision.

B) No, maybe they don't believe it, or maybe they don't wish to pay royalties on the idea as people did with the 3 ring, or the Crossbraced canopy.

Quote

It'd be nice if someone like John Leblanc or an actual canopy manufacturer (someone involved in the aerodynamic side of it) stepped in with some info on these (I'm sure they've all researched them)

Several people have. Beezy, the original designer, several test pilots.....you just haven't heard it from who you want......what makes you think John LeBlanc knows anything about them?

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[ianmdrennan 2]

Quote

A) at least one manufacturer did. Precision.

Ok, so 2 out of how many? Not mention that one was a partner so they had all the designs and schematics. I don't see these on the XAOS which, I believe, came out after they had this technology......

Quote

Several people have. Beezy, the original designer, several test pilots

The only KNOWLEDGEABLE person I've heard comment on is Beezy. Beezy has come out openly and said he didn't understand the in depth technical aspects of them and couldn't give details.

Quote

you just haven't heard it from who you want

You're right, there hasn't been one instance (that I've read) of data presented. All I've read is speculation. Beezy's been very forthcoming with what he knows, but read above. Sorry but I want to hear other manufacturers experience, if any, dealing with these things. Just cause "you say so" isn't good enough for me, last I checked you didn't manufacture these things either.

As for John Leblanc it was an example take it as such.

edit: I have no vested interest whether these work or not, but I read some comments where people who simply don't have the DATA are talking about these things like they're a fact. Basically I see 1 person with any knowledge (Beezy) giving information and everyone else speculating on either side.

Blues,
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

I don't see these on the XAOS which, I believe, came out after they had this technology......

Actually not. The Xaos is admittedly a FX/VX refinement, and the traits these winglets produce are not ones desired in the Xaos line.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

I take it that is just your opinion? The engineers designing high speed airplane wings and NASA think they might serve a purpose.

Are you suggesting that they do the same thing as winglets? I've posted about my thoughts on em a couple times so I won't bother again, but I don't believe for one second that they do the same thing that winglets do on airplanes.

Dave

[VectorBoy 0]

The ones that aircraft design engineers put on aircraft are completly different in placement, shape and size. Even the models on the advanced paraglider have a much different frontal shape and overall length. Dr Whitcomb would drag you and the canopy featuring nipples to the wind tunnel ( the horizontal kind ), smoke in hand, if you suggested to him that those do what his winglets do on the subject of vortices.

Honestly line over keepers sounds about right. I've heard that the canopy is a fine example hi-performance modern design. Those nipples are nothing a patch couldn't fix to make it a fantastic canopy.

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

Quote

The engineers designing high speed airplane wings and NASA think they might serve a purpose.

Canopies don't go that fast yet, do you really think that at the speeds reached even on a full speed approach at a higher then normal wingloading (3.0-ish:1) that it would make a difference?

I don't doubt they make a difference in aircraft applications, I really think that all they do for current design canopies is increase drag.

They are not for effect at high speed, they effect control of a high speed wing, ie high performance canopy, when it is flown at slow speeds.

But not being "KNOWLEDGEABLE" what do I know.

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[UDSkyJunkie 0]

Quote

Are you suggesting that they do the same thing as winglets?

That is, in fact, exactly what the manufacturer claims... that they reduce wingtip vortices, thereby reducing drag, increasing lift, and allowing for better overall performance. Does it work? I haven't a fricking clue, and I have NEVER met anyone who does. Everyone knows that the canopies that have these things on them are pretty high-performance, but whether it has anything to do with the winglets, well... who knows? I tend to lean toward it being a gimmick, and believe that time will tell... if it's useless, it'll go away in time, or at least not be pursued by other manufacturers.

To play devil's advocate for a second, though... the stabalizers on your canopy are designed for the same purpose: to act essentially as winglets. And they did their job so well that they are now prettymuch mandatory.

"Some people follow their dreams, others hunt them down and beat them mercilessly into submission."

[mjosparky 4]

Quote

Quote

I take it that is just your opinion? The engineers designing high speed airplane wings and NASA think they might serve a purpose.

Are you suggesting that they do the same thing as winglets? I've posted about my thoughts on em a couple times so I won't bother again, but I don't believe for one second that they do the same thing that winglets do on airplanes.

Dave

I am not suggesting anything more then one persons opinion does not make it fact. Nor did I mention anything about winglets. Have you considered that they might have a similar effect of a stall fence like those found on a Roberson STOL conversion? This mod. has a proven positive effect on slow flight performance.

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Honestly line over keepers sounds about right. I've heard that the canopy is a fine example hi-performance modern design. Those nipples are nothing a patch couldn't fix to make it a fantastic canopy.

Really, and you know this how? How many jumps have you put on a canopy with that in it's design?

The results are shown in comparitive slow flight modes.

So being that you're so knowlageable in things aerodynamic, how much effect you you think those "Front Deflectors" on your S3 have?

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

the stabalizers on your canopy are designed for the same purpose: to act essentially as winglets. And they did their job so well that they are now prettymuch mandatory.

Stabalizers are on their way out for high performance canopies, and the effects they were orginaly created to combat are not present to the same degree.

The Stabalizer and the Winglet may share some of the same duties, but do not act in the same mannor.

This entire thread has a tint of humor to it, as many in it have no experience with the product, nor with a variety canopies in general with which to make a statement.

Of course the above is just MY opinion, and like assholes, not only do I have one, I might have even been called one a time or two.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[VectorBoy 0]

So being that you're so knowlageable in things aerodynamic, how much effect you you think those "Front Deflectors" on your S3 have?

[skydiverton 0]

Quote

i like to call them line-over keepers

Just adding a hookknife to these items will solve your line-over automativ

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Using your droque to gain stability is a bad habit,
Especially when you are jumping a sport rig

[kallend 2,105]

What HIPER says is:
---------------------------------
Winglets The Winglets, which are attached to the upper surface of the canopy, add stability in several
ways. Inspired by airplanes and paragliders, we transferred this technology to our canopies. Due to
improved airflow, the touchdown (or stall) speed of the canopy is slowed considerably. Winglets provide for
better recovery from steep carving turns, and improve directional control during cross-wind landings. They
also help to prevent the diving effect of line twists that is often associated with eliptical canopies.
-----------------------------------

Now, IMO, they are wing fences, not winglets in the conventional sense as defined by aero engineers. They may provide some control of undesirable spanwise flow at high AOA.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

Have you considered that they might have a similar effect of a stall fence like those found on a Roberson STOL conversion?

Actually that's exactly what I suggested in the last thread on this topic. Here's exactly what I said last time.

Dave

[riggerrob 643]

Sounds to me like HiPer's "winglets" are designed to cut spanwise flow of turbulent air at low airspeeds, similar to fences on Robertson STOL kits installed on some Cessnas.