We reported last month that the Paraglider Manufacturers’ Association, PMA, had called into question whether Ozone’s BBHPP fitted the existing definition of a Class 3 hang glider (paraglider) as having ‘no rigid primary structure’.
The PMA are to recommend to CIVL and the FAI that the definitions of both ‘primary structure’ and ‘rigid’ need to be clarified, and the definition of FAI Class 3 needs to be modified to read: “Hang gliders having a flexible structure (paragliders), and which are able to demonstrate consistent ability to safely take-off and land in nil-wind conditions.
In the PMA’s recommendations, flexibility is defined by the ability of a component to be bent around a radius of 1cm by 180° without being damaged. This test of flexibility will be executed in at least two perpendicular planes and will be performed when the component is integrated into the glider”.
The carbon reinforcements used in Ozone’s BBHPP do not fit this definition of flexible, though all other manufacturers’ Mylar and plastic reinforcements do, pushing the BBHPP into a class (FAI class 6) where it will currently be on its own.
This has sparked a lot of strong feelings and debate, and the PMA have published a list of Frequently Asked Questions.
Ozone’s website also has more information and a video about the BBHPP.
• Got news? Send it to us at news@xccontent.local. Fair use applies to this article: if you reproduce it online, please credit correctly and link to xcmag.com or the original article. No reproduction in print. Copyright remains with Cross Country magazine. Thanks!
Subscribe to the world’s favourite hang gliding and paragliding magazine
