Re: Dead birds and propaganda leaflets

Subject Re: Dead birds and propaganda leaflets
From (Andy Wardley)
Date Tue, 21 Apr 1998 07:37:30 GMT
Newsgroups rec.kites
Airfoils wrote:
> If you think maneuvers are just straight lines and loops, you're dead wrong.

Absolutely not.

> There are a thousand or more ways to turn and implement variations on
> angles, turns and straight lines. Your view of maneuvers is simplistic at
> the very best.

An Axel or Flat Spin is just such one example of the "thousand or more ways to turn". Your view of maneuvers is simplistic at the very best.

> His point was essentially that trick kites sacrifice
> efficiency for trickability which is absolutely true.

I think you'll find that modern kites (which are all "trick-enabled" these days) are considerably more "efficient" than the kites of 5 years ago. This is why team fliers continue to use older kites (like TOTL) simply because they have inefficient sails which slow the kite down (and make a hell of a lot of noise in the process).

If "efficiency" wasn't exactly what you meant and you were commenting more on the "flyability" of kites, then I'm afraid we still disagree for the same reasons. The design, construction and materials used in modern kites today (all of which are "trick-enabled", incidentally) make for a kite which clearly out-performs kites of just a few years ago.

> In any case I still feel kiting as it always has, ignores where it came 
> from in favor of whats next.

I can see your point, and I do think it would be sad if kite designers made kites that did tricks at the expense of more traditional flying techniques. There certainly are dedicated trick kites like that (don't try flying a Stranger Level 7 in a straight line for too long!) but on the whole, most kites are excellent all-round performers.

I urge you to pick up a kite like a Benson Phantom, a Prism Illusion, or even a Jam Session, and see how it flies doing exactly what you want it to do. I hope you'll be pleasantly surprised. The kites will do tricks if you ever find the desire to try it, but on the whole, they'll fly in whatever way you like quite happily.

> Kiters have little if no regard for thier past. In particular new ones
> because those that would be mentors prefer to highlight themselves rather
> then teach where things came from and who gets credit for what.

Rubbish! Show me which store sells "Kite Fliers Cards" with sticks of bubblegum. How many times a week do kite flying competitions appear on TV? How many schoolkids are taught kite flying at school? How many books can you name that detail the history of kiting?

Compare that the the stupendous amount of marketing merchandise that makes international heroes of baseball and football stars. That's why everyone can tell you who they are, not because they respect them any more.

Most fliers I know have utmost respect for the fliers that went before them.

Incidentally, I haven't got a clue who those people are and I don't expect you could tell me much about George Best or Donald Bradman. In these such cases, sport can be very insular. But I can tell you what Jalbert and Rogallo did. And Don Tabor, and Peter Lynn, and Peter Powell, and Mike Simmonds, and Tim Benson, and Alec Pearson, and so on.

Just because you don't see much evidence of kite fliers and designers being worhsipped on TV, doesn't mean that people aren't worshipping them in their own ways.

> As stated above you are certainly not creative or versatile

I like this quote. I'm going to have it engraved on the next trophy I win. :-)

> In anycase, it appears a mob mentality has developed here in which
> case there is no geting through to any of you because your first and
> foremost priority is defending your aspect of kiting, which in my
> point of view is far overblown for what it is.

No. If you read what I said in my last post, I'm trying to defend ALL aspects of kiting. I am in no way whatsoever saying that trick flying is any better, worse, easier or harder than any other kind of flying. As Collette quite rightly says, people should do whatever it is that makes them happy. I'm all in favour of that. No-one is going to stop you flying how you want to fly. But no-one is going to stop us flying how we want to fly, either.

You have a view on trick flying that is based on the people that you have seen. If these people can only fly tricks then they're not very versatile fliers and probably not much fun to watch. But if they're having fun, then who are we to tell them to stop? And just because I, or anyone else, can fly "tricks" doesn't mean that I'm not a versatile flier. Some are, some aren't, but it's got nothing to do with how well they can trick a kite.

It's absolutely fine that you've got no interest in tricks, and if manufacturers truly were squeezing fliers like yourself out of the frame by only making kites that do tricks, then I would truly sympathise with you. There's some evidence of that in the pure tricks kites that some designers make, but there's hundreds more excellent designs of truly versatile kites available:- far, far, more than there were 5 or 10 years ago.


Andy Wardley  <>     Signature regenerating.  Please remain seated.
      <>     For a good time: