[Harry]

all hang gliders need to be able to pull high G loads to survive recovery in these situations.

+1

Over the years I have seen pilots die from poor glider designs, lacking structural integrity and lacking any sort of dive recovery.
I witnessed a friend flying an Aolus, snap his leading edge while doing a high G turn, the kind you do when aggressively working thermals.
Luckily, after two tries, his reserve opened as he went through power lines and started a neighborhood fire.

[Dayhead]

I understand that the ability to pull high G loads may be necessary on occasion. My hypothetical suggestion was merely that by limiting a glider's ability to pull high G loads, a lighter glider could be built. It makes sense to me that the stiffer you make a glider, the heavier it will be.

So perhaps my suggestion of a glider that will only pull 2.5 G's before it flexes out of the way is too radical. I'll accept that. So how much G should a glider need to pull for safe flying?

What I was trying to say is that if a glider could flex enough, it wouldn't break. It would simply vent extra loading. So it begs the question: Just how much do we really need? This is important, because the stiffer we make it, the heavier it will be. Do we need 6 G's? 4?
Please keep in mind that I'm suggesting that a glider can be built that will compete with the PG's. Slower stall speeds and tighter circling diameters. Easy consistent landing qualities.

It is and it isn't "rocket science". We can rise to the challenge.

Many years ago I went on a hang gliding safari in the midwest with Bill Finn. We foot-launched mountains and hills, and we did a fair bit of towing.

We were static line towing somewhere in Kansas, and were having some mechanical problems with the towing equipment. Bill was feverishly working to get the equipment up, and some of the flyer's were making disparaging remarks.

Bill looked up from his endeavers and said: "I just wanna hear some reason why it just might work!"

That's all that I want to hear from you guys. That just maybe, with a bunch of effort and a little luck, we can build the Gap Filler: A hangie that can hang in there with the paragliders. A hangie that can fly as slow, turn as tight, and be as easy to land,consistently, as they do.

The future of HG lies in the balance. If we can't pull it off, well, I think you know what the answer will be: That paragliding is the new hang gliding.

I don't want to see it happen. Dig deep and help me find an answer. And like Bill said that day, "I just wanna hear one reason why it just might work!"

This does not mean that I don't want to hear the reasons why it won't work.

[magentabluesky]

Steve,

I think Wills Wings calls it the Alpha.

Be Happy!

[Frank Colver]

I wish my Alpha 210 was 250 or 270 for Dockweiler flying.

I never did know what my SST area was, because it was the prototype the specs were never published. The production SST's, one could see that they were less area.

Frank

[ARP]

Dayhead:- "What I was trying to say is that if a glider could flex enough, it wouldn't break."

All of the bamboo gliders I built did just that. None of them ever failed in flight they simply flexed and relieved the stresses. Aluminium does not flex as well and if you go beyond the elastic limit fatigue or failure occur.

Tony

[Frank Colver]

Richard Miller's Conduit Condor, at the first Otto meet, May 23, 1971, had what he referred to as an aero-flexible design. Most of the flex was in the outer portions of the wing and involved the area that would be reflexed or twisted for pitch stability. The wing flew better than any other glider out there that day. However, it has always been my opinion that if put into a steep dive it would not have recovered as the tips went negative. It, however, was the inspiration for my Skysail design which did not have the aero-flex of Richard's design. I put in ridged twist as well as an inverted airfoil at the tips to reduce the amount of physical twist needed.

Frank

[JoeF]

[JoeF]

Aeroflexible Structures
patent
Francis Rogallo
Rodger L. Naeseth

https://www.google.com/patents/US3443779

[Rick Masters]

    Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania have created the thinnest plates that can be picked up and manipulated by hand, using corrugated plates of aluminum oxide. They are thousands of times thinner than a sheet of paper and hundreds of times thinner than household cling wrap, but they spring back to their original shape after being bent and twisted.
    Like cling wrap, comparably thin materials immediately curl up on themselves and get stuck in deformed shapes if they are not stretched on a frame or backed by another material. Graphene is even thinner, but it also curls up.
    Being able to stay in shape without additional support would allow this material, and others designed on its principles, to be used in aviation and other structural applications where low weight is at a premium.
http://www.kurzweilai.net/these-are-the-thinnest-strongest-plates-that-can-be-picked-up-by-hand

[JoeF]

Thanks, Rick !!!
Great find and share!