Anyone knows of a professional serve of this type in North America,
for an existing canopy with frame?
Udo

Udo.
I make a bunch of transparencies for race cars as well as a few canopies
now and then. My experience FWIW, is that it is a bad idea to tint
canopies to make them darker. I suggest that the driver or pilot
buy the correct darkness of sunglasses for the conditions. On overcast
or murky days, you cannot magically "untint" a canopy to see better, but
you can either take off the glasses, or get lighter ones. NOW if you are
getting
roasted and can't cool the cockpit, you do have the option of using dark
static cling tint to "provide shade" and keep the temps down. The stuff is
pretty
inexpensive and available at Home Depot.

--
Have a great day

Scott
"Udo" > wrote in message
ps.com...
> Anyone knows of a professional serve of this type in North America,
> for an existing canopy with frame?
> Udo
>

Hi,

I don't have a strong opinion on this subject, but I can add one experience
point. I was once part owner of a very nice Schweizer 1-35c that had a new
tinted canopy when I bought into it. It was tinted a medium to dark grew.
It looked fantastic from outside the glider and worked well in bright
sunshine. However, there were times when under dark overcast layers that I
wished it wasn't tinted. It wasn't a big problem at all.

I would think that a very light mirrored tint would be nice - as long as it
is not too dark. It would keep heat out on hot days and look very cool.

Paul Remde

"pbc76049" > wrote in message
...
> Udo.
> I make a bunch of transparencies for race cars as well as a few canopies
> now and then. My experience FWIW, is that it is a bad idea to tint
> canopies to make them darker. I suggest that the driver or pilot
> buy the correct darkness of sunglasses for the conditions. On overcast
> or murky days, you cannot magically "untint" a canopy to see better, but
> you can either take off the glasses, or get lighter ones. NOW if you are
> getting
> roasted and can't cool the cockpit, you do have the option of using dark
> static cling tint to "provide shade" and keep the temps down. The stuff
> is pretty
> inexpensive and available at Home Depot.
>
> --
> Have a great day
>
> Scott
> "Udo" > wrote in message
> ps.com...
>> Anyone knows of a professional serve of this type in North America,
>> for an existing canopy with frame?
>> Udo
>>
>
>

The 2 seat Lark that I did cross-country instruction in last year had a
brown/gold tinted canopy. It was fantastic. It was not quite as dark
as my brown/rose sunglasses. It significantly enhanced vis in all sky
conditions (never flew at night however). It probably lowered cockpit
temps but I don't know.

The first time I flew it I thought the altimeter was malfunctioning
because the ground looked so much closer than what I was accustomed to.
Other pilots noticed the same illusion. Perhaps it's a "blue blocker"
effect.

It's important to understand that the brown, rose, and gold tints
produce a very different result than gray. I would never want a gray
canopy unless it could be varied as needed. That's a ways off
technolgically I imagine, and brown would still be better.

Everyone who flew that Lark loved that canopy. I have no idea how to
tint an existing canopy but I'd sure like to know!

Matt Michael

I am looking for an after market service that can do the job similar to
the original factory conopies if that is all possible..
Udo


wrote:
> The 2 seat Lark that I did cross-country instruction in last year had a
> brown/gold tinted canopy. It was fantastic. It was not quite as dark
> as my brown/rose sunglasses. It significantly enhanced vis in all sky
> conditions (never flew at night however). It probably lowered cockpit
> temps but I don't know.
>
> The first time I flew it I thought the altimeter was malfunctioning
> because the ground looked so much closer than what I was accustomed to.
> Other pilots noticed the same illusion. Perhaps it's a "blue blocker"
> effect.
>
> It's important to understand that the brown, rose, and gold tints
> produce a very different result than gray. I would never want a gray
> canopy unless it could be varied as needed. That's a ways off
> technolgically I imagine, and brown would still be better.
>
> Everyone who flew that Lark loved that canopy. I have no idea how to
> tint an existing canopy but I'd sure like to know!
>
> Matt Michael

wrote:
> The 2 seat Lark that I did cross-country instruction in last year had a
> brown/gold tinted canopy. It was fantastic. It was not quite as dark
> as my brown/rose sunglasses. It significantly enhanced vis in all sky
> conditions (never flew at night however). It probably lowered cockpit
> temps but I don't know.
>
> The first time I flew it I thought the altimeter was malfunctioning
> because the ground looked so much closer than what I was accustomed to.
> Other pilots noticed the same illusion. Perhaps it's a "blue blocker"
> effect.
>
> It's important to understand that the brown, rose, and gold tints
> produce a very different result than gray. I would never want a gray
> canopy unless it could be varied as needed. That's a ways off
> technolgically I imagine, and brown would still be better.
>
> Everyone who flew that Lark loved that canopy. I have no idea how to
> tint an existing canopy but I'd sure like to know!

Was it better than wearing sunglasses tinted the same way? Or simply
more convenient than having that type of sunglasses?

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

Tinted glider canopies are usually blue or blue/green
to reduce IR transmission (to reduce the direct sunlight
heat onto the pilot) rather than brown to cut the blue/UV
end of the spectrum (like pilot spectacles).







At 20:06 16 December 2006, Eric Greenwell wrote:
wrote:
>> The 2 seat Lark that I did cross-country instruction
>>in last year had a
>> brown/gold tinted canopy. It was fantastic. It was
>>not quite as dark
>> as my brown/rose sunglasses. It significantly enhanced
>>vis in all sky
>> conditions (never flew at night however). It probably
>>lowered cockpit
>> temps but I don't know.
>>
>> The first time I flew it I thought the altimeter was
>>malfunctioning
>> because the ground looked so much closer than what
>>I was accustomed to.
>> Other pilots noticed the same illusion. Perhaps
>>it's a 'blue blocker'
>> effect.
>>
>> It's important to understand that the brown, rose,
>>and gold tints
>> produce a very different result than gray. I would
>>never want a gray
>> canopy unless it could be varied as needed. That's
>>a ways off
>> technolgically I imagine, and brown would still be
>>better.
>>
>> Everyone who flew that Lark loved that canopy. I
>>have no idea how to
>> tint an existing canopy but I'd sure like to know!
>
>Was it better than wearing sunglasses tinted the same
>way? Or simply
>more convenient than having that type of sunglasses?
>
>--
>Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
>* Change 'netto' to 'net' to email me directly
>* 'Transponders in Sailplanes' http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
>* 'A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation' at
>www.motorglider.org
>

> Was it better than wearing sunglasses tinted the same way? Or simply
> more convenient than having that type of sunglasses?

Well my sunglasses are prescription so I'd wear them anyway. With or
without it improved vis, reduced fatigue, just made the world easier on
the eyes. I think the optics of the plastic were really good too and
it was not very scratched so detail in the distance and contrast seemed
remarkable. My front seaters always enjoyed it regardless of whether
they had sunglasses on or not. After you closed the canopy you'd
forget it was tinted in about half a minute. Only when you looked out
the slider vent windows on the side did you realize the difference.
The world looked like it was being projected on 2 really crappy 6 inch
black and white tv monitors. It always made people laugh when I'd
point that out because it was so true. With that kind of immediate
comparison it made you wonder why anyone would ever want a clear
canopy.

MM

wrote:

> Well my sunglasses are prescription so I'd wear them anyway. With or
> without it improved vis, reduced fatigue, just made the world easier on
> the eyes. I think the optics of the plastic were really good too and
> it was not very scratched so detail in the distance and contrast seemed
> remarkable. My front seaters always enjoyed it regardless of whether
> they had sunglasses on or not. After you closed the canopy you'd
> forget it was tinted in about half a minute. Only when you looked out
> the slider vent windows on the side did you realize the difference.
> The world looked like it was being projected on 2 really crappy 6 inch
> black and white tv monitors. It always made people laugh when I'd
> point that out because it was so true. With that kind of immediate
> comparison it made you wonder why anyone would ever want a clear
> canopy.

Perhaps because hardly anyone gets to fly a glider with such a canopy?

I do wear brown tinted sunglasses, and I like them, but that doesn't
help me understand how having the whole canopy tinted like my sunglasses
is better than the sunglasses and a clear canopy.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

My Saab 900 Turbo had factory gold tinting on all of its windows. I
always felt alert in that car, loved driving it long distances (12-14
hours behind the wheel), and I never felt tired at the end of such a
drive. By contrast, my BMW 530 with factory grey tinting on all windows
isn't quite in the same league as far as alertness and fatigue at the
end of a long drive goes. Both cars were driven with clear glasses as
well as neutral gray sunglasses.

I can't really insist that the difference is all due to tinting color,
but I think it's a factor.

-John


Eric Greenwell wrote:

> Perhaps because hardly anyone gets to fly a glider with such a canopy?
>
> I do wear brown tinted sunglasses, and I like them, but that doesn't
> help me understand how having the whole canopy tinted like my sunglasses
> is better than the sunglasses and a clear canopy.

Eric Greenwell wrote:
>
> I do wear brown tinted sunglasses, and I like them, but that doesn't
> help me understand how having the whole canopy tinted like my sunglasses
> is better than the sunglasses and a clear canopy.

Well, perhaps cutting down and filtering ALL the light coming into the
cockpit not only reduces heating and UV but also internal reflections
and light sneaking in around the edges of ones glasses. It's another
layer of protection. Plus, some people don't wear glasses. I'm not
claiming it's better but the vis was great in all conditions and it
sure felt good!

MM

I had a friend who had a Lancair Legacy. The person who bought it from
him had a tinted film applied. The application was similar to auto
window tint film, however the film was quite different to typical auto
tint film. It had a layer of gold, so was somewhat reflective on the
outside and had a brownish/goldish tint. It was extremely efficient at
blocking UV and IR and it was reported that the cockpit temperature was
dramantically reduced. The optics were quite good. The film had to be
applied in strips due to limited stretch, so there were little lines at
the joints, but not objectionable. The only downside is it is quite
expensive. I am waiting for more info from my friend and will post
details when I have them.

On Dec 15, 11:19 pm, "Udo" > wrote:
> Anyone knows of a professional serve of this type in North America,
> for an existing canopy with frame?
> Udo

Udo wrote:
> Anyone knows of a professional serve of this type in North America,
> for an existing canopy with frame?
> Udo

An alternative to tinting the canopy is to use a removable tinted
plastic sheet on the inside of the canopy. I use this during the winter
for a "double pane" insulating effect to eliminate the frosting and
fogging I'd get during wave flying. It's cheap and easy, but not as
esthetically pleasing as a tinted canopy, and it increases reflections a
bit.

I don't use a tinted panel, because I want all the sun's heat I can get
during the winter. I don't use it in the summer, because I don't get
fogging/frosting then, and the places I normally fly don't get hot
enough to make tinted panels worthwhile.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org

Eric Greenwell wrote:
> Udo wrote:
> > Anyone knows of a professional serve of this type in North America,
> > for an existing canopy with frame?
> > Udo
>
> An alternative to tinting the canopy is to use a removable tinted
> plastic sheet on the inside of the canopy. I use this during the winter
> for a "double pane" insulating effect to eliminate the frosting and
> fogging I'd get during wave flying. It's cheap and easy, but not as
> esthetically pleasing as a tinted canopy, and it increases reflections a
> bit.
>
> I don't use a tinted panel, because I want all the sun's heat I can get
> during the winter. I don't use it in the summer, because I don't get
> fogging/frosting then, and the places I normally fly don't get hot
> enough to make tinted panels worthwhile.
>

It looks like I will have to fly with a clear canopy.
In the past three years I have appreciate the noticeable effect of
reduced temperature
with a blue canopy. It makes a difference when flying on cloudless
days.
The insert, as Eric mentioned has been used successfully in the past
but is not cool looking.
Udo

Udo wrote:
> Eric Greenwell wrote:
> > Udo wrote:
> > > Anyone knows of a professional serve of this type in North America,
> > > for an existing canopy with frame?
> > > Udo

Was wishing for that service a few years ago. Don't think the job can
be done and maintain the optical clarity of a good canopy.
Only time I was unhappy with a tinted canopy was during a storm on
the ridge in Pennsylvania: Cruising just above the treetops with heavy
rain on a tinted canopy, to a tree-surrounded field chosen when high
enough to actually see the field. All was fine but the approach was a
bit tense, tint being one factor. Other than that one time, my
preference is for tinted.
Jim

> Only when you looked out
> the slider vent windows on the side did you realize the difference.
> The world looked like it was being projected on 2 really crappy 6 inch
> black and white tv monitors. It always made people laugh when I'd
> point that out because it was so true. With that kind of immediate
> comparison it made you wonder why anyone would ever want a clear
> canopy.

The effect was due to the fact that your eyes were adapted to the lower =
intensity of the light filtered through the canopy. In that context, the =
higher light levels of the view through the side vent resulted in =
overexposure and loss of detail. There is no correlation between this =
and the view through a clear canopy.
=20
This is not to say that tinted canopies do not have advantages. Only =
that the inference above is flawed.
=20

Francisco De Almeida wrote:
>
> The effect was due to the fact that your eyes were adapted to the lower =
> intensity of the light filtered through the canopy. In that context, the =
> higher light levels of the view through the side vent resulted in =
> overexposure and loss of detail. There is no correlation between this =
> and the view through a clear canopy.

In a word, Duh.

> This is not to say that tinted canopies do not have advantages. Only =
> that the inference above is flawed.
>

It may be flawed to say "There is no correlation". I think it can be
objectively demonstrated that the correct filtering of certian
wavelengths with blue, brown, gold, rose tints can in fact increase
perception of contrast leading to refined detection of detail in
distant landscapes, clouds, and traffic. If not, well, it certianly
cuts down on thermal and UV related stress, fatigue, and damage.

I miss my tinted canopy! OK?

:)

Matt Michael

Sorry you didn't get it. I'm not saying your opinions are wrong, only =
your way of arriving at them is.
Happy Xmas, pal.

I have a glider with probably the darkest canopy I''ve ever seen. It's
absolutely great in the hot, high altitude skies of Moriarty during the
summer. Much cooler than the clear) canopy on the last glider I had.
However, it gets pretty chilly when running cloud streets at 17 k or
better. I can't complain about the visibility either. I don't have any
empirical data to back up my opinion. But I haven't hit anything yet.

In the winter, flying wave, I wouldn't mind having some more solar
energy in the cockpit, but since most of my flying is summer in hot
conditions, I'll take the darkroom. (It's so dark that NOBODY can even
see what I look like. A blessing, I am sure.

Mark Mocho