Standup Zone Forum
The Foil Zone => Wingsurfing, Windfoiling, Wingfoiling, Wing SUP => Topic started by: DownSouth on January 18, 2020, 09:55:51 PM
-
Hi,
Wondering why are there only two wings on the market with bar ? Duotone and Dragon fly, I have used the duotone and can see the value of a wing with bar. I als have hearded that Starboard will brign a wing with bar , are there any other manufacturer ?
RE the Duotone there is the stability qestion but that will be solved in time.
-
I made a fake boom that attaches to my F-One handles. Much better that those floppy things, and it makes transitions easier because I can grab the middle of the boom to do the hand switch.
-
Wings with booms will be coming from most brands - I've been riding both and there are pro's and con's to both.
Guys here have converted F-One Swings to boom by cutting off the strut - works great.
Starboard proto-type is looking really good......
-
Though Still in the early stages of wind foiling, I have used both the Duotone and F-One and early findings are I find the Duotone easier for me having windsurfed for many years. The boom allows me to keep my eyes on the water and still change hand positions , while with the F-One I have to look for the straps. Also in the lulls, I am able to keep the Duotone wing aloft with the rigid boom while the F-One seems to flop on top of my hands and is harder to keep aloft. I love the convenience of the F-One packing away in a backpack and perfect for travel and why I bought it, but at this point in my learning, I like the Duotone...also like the clear window on the Duotone
-
A friend at my spot just damaged his board when the boom hit it. So that is one possible advantage of not having one.
Grabbing the F-one handles becomes second nature. At first you definitely have to look, but eventually you don't have to, you just know where it is.
-
I am in the no boom Camp. We have owned both and the ultra light weight and light air advantage boomless won out. I know that we will see upgraded rigid handles in the not so distant future. :)
-
The weight will be solved with better material, I am sure. Aluminium vs Carbon.
The argument of the boom hitting the board well there is very little one can argue against that.
PeterP have you used an F-One with boom/bar? How did the wing function is their a noticeable improvement?
-
Duotone coming out soon with much lighter carbon boom, super stable profile and a new wave dedicated ‘hybrid’ wing.. we’ll see!
-
Some photos of duotone have appeared already. it even looks like they will bring a wing with handles.
But why are there no other companies?
-
Some photos of duotone have appeared already. it even looks like they will bring a wing with handles.
But why are there no other companies?
Are you guys going to be producing one?
-
Not sure yet, still doing my homework, have the proto work done but am still trying to work out why most brands don't have one.
We have solved some issues they have on the DT
- no battens
- less wing wash etc
On the other side, the bar hitting the board is simply unavoidable. Found that the bar is ok if it hits the board as long as there is some EVA the bigger problem is the end of the bar.
-
Have you experimented with rigid strut handles or rigid strut mounted bars?
-
The weight will be solved with better material, I am sure. Aluminium vs Carbon.
The argument of the boom hitting the board well there is very little one can argue against that.
PeterP have you used an F-One with boom/bar? How did the wing function is their a noticeable improvement?
I tried a boom-enabled Swing in crap wind so can't comment on whether the wing will perform better in powered up conditions, but transitions are undoubtedly easier with a boom.
I'm on the fence with booms, transitions are easier with a boom but the extra weight and risk of board damage etc doesn't appeal to me. Maybe when we get light carbon booms it will be more clear, the Duotone boom is 1st gen rubbish.
-
Maybe if the boom was covered like a kite bar then it wouldn't damage the boards. It would add weight depending on the material. Soft material would be light but a more durable material like on the slingshot bars would add weight for sure
-
Any pics of the prototype starboard?
-
I made super lightweight carbon booms for my Duotones. Far superior to the aluminum stuff and easy to do. What I don't like about Duotone is the instability of the 5M wing. What is a minor fault with the 3 and 4M is more irritating with the 5M. It works, and it's a solid second best in my book, but the stability of the F-one is better.
The fake boom on my F-ones would be unlikely to damage anything--less than 300 grams. I've come up with a few designs for ultralight actual booms, but I'd have to take apart a strut and do a bunch of sewing to make one. As soon as I can get my new 3D printer to stop making piles of plastic instead of parts I'll print a few bits and try to get someone to do the sewing.
-
Have you experimented with rigid strut handles or rigid strut mounted bars?
Not quite sure what you mean by Ridge strut. We made some very rigid handles and the get more comfortable in the hand sure but the weight becomes an issue. I do not see that advantage here yet sure you get to have better input into the wing but that is minimal.
The problem with mounting a bar to a Strut is also weight. It can be done relatively easy. Believe it or not but a strut with bladder and all construction part all add weight. Were a carbon bar/light front pice can be in the same world weight wise as a strut +-. If I am not mistaken we can get the weight diff down to +- 30 g dry ...
Perhaps the solution here is the dragon Fly solution with removable handles.
Any pics of the prototype starboard?
There are some photos of the Starboard wing which have been taken at the Dusseldroff Boot trade fair.
-
Swing with Duotone boom conversion
-
Swing with Duotone boom conversion
Ok, now we’re talking. Sort of what I’m envisioning for a V2 Duotone. Flatten the wing, get rid of the massive battens, go ultralight Carbon,......and of course up the prices by 30% over the V1,.....cause we’re all hooked and willing to pay the price :P
-
Have you experimented with rigid strut handles or rigid strut mounted bars?
Not quite sure what you mean by Ridge strut. We made some very rigid handles and the get more comfortable in the hand sure but the weight becomes an issue. I do not see that advantage here yet sure you get to have better input into the wing but that is minimal.
The problem with mounting a bar to a Strut is also weight. It can be done relatively easy. Believe it or not but a strut with bladder and all construction part all add weight. Were a carbon bar/light front pice can be in the same world weight wise as a strut +-. If I am not mistaken we can get the weight diff down to +- 30 g dry ...
Perhaps the solution here is the dragon Fly solution with removable handles.
Any pics of the prototype starboard?
There are some photos of the Starboard wing which have been taken at the Dusseldroff Boot trade fair.
Hi DownSouth,
I don't mean a rigid strut. I mean rigid handles mounted to an inflatable strut.
The Swing is the lightest wing design right now. The 5 Meter Swing for instance is 4.2 lbs. That is .4 lbs lighter than a 3 meter Duotone boomed wing. That ultra light weight and the deep stable shape that they have achieved is what has made it so desirable. I know that I am not looking for major change to that design. Tweaks to the handles would be great though. Have a look at the image below. The total handle span on the Swing is terrific. Adding span to that would just be adding excess weight. The current crutch style booms are 1.8 lbs and they put boom in areas that are never used. You could very easily remove the fabric handles on a Swing style design and replace them with rigid handles, rigid micro bars or single bar with that same spread. That would be a very light weight solution that could offer modularity and the most immediate response to user input.
My perfect would be two handles only that were each 1.5x the width of current swing handles. This would eliminate the third handle. One problem with all of the fabric handles is that they have an arced shape which is partially unusable. By going to a rigid more rectangular handle at a slightly larger width and with a rigid attachment to the strut you could answer all current sniggles. Easy hand passes, immediate response, and all without any significant weight sacrifice. Handles could be removable (tool free) and usable across all wing sizes so the wings would become even more packable and the expense of a really nice handle set could be spread across all wing sizes. To accomplish that you would need to add nothing rigid the the wing. There are a variety of attachment methods that would allow this and that could make use of the width of the strut to get a really bomber attachment with much better leverage than a boom or current handles. using a single bar across that same span would be fine as well. You could easily give riders that option as the system could/should be modular.
(https://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=35185.0;attach=103140;image)
-
I think the big problem with the larger duotones is that the canopy isn't controlled well. A solution like the converted Fone is pretty close to what I wanted to do--connect a web of cloth to the boom in a few places. That boom looks needlessly heavy. Thin-walled carbon tubing (I used light Kenalu tapered paddle shafts) would weigh a third of what that looks like from just a picture. I did one telescoping and then decided to just make wing-specific booms for the least weight. I added a ring of carbon for the clew to attach to and an outhaul for tension adjustment. Weight is a big deal with these wings.
-
My perfect would be two handles only that were each 1.5x the width of current swing handles. This would eliminate the third handle. One problem with all of the fabric handles is that they have an arced shape which is partially unusable. By going to a rigid more rectangular handle at a slightly larger width and with a rigid attachment to the strut you could answer all current sniggles. Easy hand passes, immediate response, and all without any significant weight sacrifice. Handles could be removable (tool free) and usable across all wing sizes so the wings would become even more packable and the expense of a really nice handle set could be spread across all wing sizes. To accomplish that you would need to add nothing rigid the the wing. There are a variety of attachment methods that would allow this and that could make use of the width of the strut to get a really bomber attachment with much better leverage than a boom or current handles. using a single bar across that same span would be fine as well. You could easily give riders that option as the system could/should be modular.
That would be my perfect system as well. I had in mind 2 slide-in ergo battens that fits right on an ergonomically improved version of the current handles.
I found a foot long piece of something that might fit the bill out of thermoplastic that is rigid as they come and weighs only 0.6oz so I'm confident that a dedicated solution for this wing could be achieved without noticeable weight and would be superior, to my taste, to any full boom solution.
-
Boss, I made 'rigid' handle covers for my early Ozone wing loops. The foam core (now upgraded by Ozone) was too thin/soft to my taste. I also did not want to radically change the OD, so I just added 'stiff' for the tops tops of the handles. The DragonFly 'removable' handles that were mentioned (I have not seen in person) appear to -perhaps be- footstrap-type overwraps. (mine are similar - except thin).
https://wetstuff.com/Ebay/OZhandlesRear.jpg
(early version pic - you can better see the top in blue)
Jim
-
Boss, I made 'rigid' handle covers for my early Ozone wing loops. The foam core (now upgraded by Ozone) was too thin/soft to my taste. I also did not want to radically change the OD, so I just added 'stiff' for the tops tops of the handles. The DragonFly 'removable' handles that were mentioned (I have not seen in person) appear to -perhaps be- footstrap-type overwraps. (mine are similar - except thin).
https://wetstuff.com/Ebay/OZhandlesRear.jpg
(early version pic - you can better see the top in blue)
Jim
Hey Jim,
I remember when you made that mod. While I think stiffeners have potential for some improvement, the full fix really needs to get rid of the sloppy fabric handles altogether and get a rigid handle firmly secured to the strut itself with increased footprint. I completely understand not wanting to make major mods to a $900.00 wing but that will be an amazing solution when it comes. Here is a link to the original Dragonfly post https://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php/topic,35457.msg408630.html#msg408630 . That one still has soft handles, etc, so in my mind it is not really that significant of an upgrade.
One really classy way that this could be done is to have to two strips of parallel Spectra webbing (or similar) running lengthwise on the strut with 3-4 inches between them. They would be stitched and reinforced so that there would be very snug loops every inch or so along the full length of each strip. The radiused base plates of the handles (or bars) would have tabs that inserted into these loops. The tabs and loops would be the same dimension. Insert when partially inflated and full inflation would fully secure them. That would allow a super rigid connection and would allow any width or configuration. It would be entirely customizable as well as very light and inexpensive.
Here is a super rudimentary strut mock-up. It shows two handles with 4 tabs each. In reality the radiused plate and the tabs would match the curve of the strut. The plate width would match the spread of the two strips (no gaps). The tabs would be rounded and the plate itself would be greatly reduced. A bar or mini bars could be attached in the same way. Any length bar would work so riders could really choose what they wanted. # of handles, length of bar, bar diameter, bar shape, 90 degree handle. No restrictions. Riders sharing a quiver can each get their perfect in a matter of seconds.
I know that I would be happy to buy a set of long carbon handles or a small bar of this design.
-
Boss, I made 'rigid' handle covers for my early Ozone wing loops. The foam core (now upgraded by Ozone) was too thin/soft to my taste. I also did not want to radically change the OD, so I just added 'stiff' for the tops tops of the handles. The DragonFly 'removable' handles that were mentioned (I have not seen in person) appear to -perhaps be- footstrap-type overwraps. (mine are similar - except thin).
https://wetstuff.com/Ebay/OZhandlesRear.jpg
(early version pic - you can better see the top in blue)
Jim
I did something similar for the first fake boom mount. I made a plate of carbon, about ten laminations, and then cut it into strips the length of the inside of the handles if they were stretched tight. I slid the strips into tube webbing and sewed on velcro fasteners. I used them both with and without the boom. Without the boom, they were a big improvement, but with the boom was much better, both for rigidity and control in transitions. But then I switched to sections of carbon tube for the attachment, which isn't as good for stiffening the handles but are more positive in holding the boom.
-
Hi ,
Here is a different point of view why a bar opposed to a strut. No question that the Foen or many other wings functions well and suits the purpose. But could the wing function be batter is it would not flex?
The Flex in this photo is still mild.
-
The Fone strut is curved like that with no load.
-
The Fone strut is curved like that with no load.
Fone has got a reflex in the back part of the profile agree. Fones was simply and example here. ( no cirt to Foen here at all )I have attached a photo of a Cab wing in a extrema situation. I am wondering is this is not a arguement for the bar which is constructed corelcty will give better profiel suport.
-
that wasp look good though 8)
-
it is not an exact science , but Fone certainly looks less curved when not loaded
-
We have bigger things to worry about. Like the whole dam wing bending. We need to be using 20 psi.
-
Hi ,
Here is a different point of view why a bar opposed to a strut. No question that the Foen or many other wings functions well and suits the purpose. But could the wing function be batter is it would not flex?
Hi DownSouth,
Current wings with handles have inches of wiggle/play on each handle. Mount a rigid (carbon or similar) handle to a well inflated strut as I have described above and it will be an incredibly positive connection. Much more so than a boom which is secured by rope or similar tied to the clew (sloppy) and braced on the other side against an inflatable leading edge. This is not like windsufing where we are clamping the boom on to a carbon mast. In reality we do not need much. The Swings work super well even with sloppy handles. It would be nice, however, to have a little more room on the front handle for hand passes and to have more rigid handles. No way that I would go for a full boom to get those things, though. Shoot, many of us in this thread have already owned and sold wings with booms.
Gaastra went very cylindrical with their strut. That may be nice for a handle/microbar setup. Why not do some R&D?
(https://www.standupzone.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=35221.0;attach=104360;image)
-
...or I'll just set you up with one of my third generation fake booms.