EN-C comparison (Update)

Easiest to manage in the category . 1 being most friendly user. (Most comfortable to fly for the average "C" pilot ) :
1- OZONE Delta M = GRADIENT Aspen 4 26
2- UP Summit XC2 M
3- ADVANCE Sigma 8 25
4- NIVIUK Artic 3
5- GIN Tribe M
6- OZONE Alpina M
7- Nova Factor 2 S = Aircross U-Cross
8-MacPara Marvel 25

All being close.


Handling in rough air: (The one that you can turn even in rough air)

1- Gradient Aspen 4 ! (Superb)
2- Nova Factor 2 = Artic 3
2- OZONE Alpina M
3- ADVANCE Sigma 8 25 & U-Cross
4- UP Summit XC2 M = Marvel 25
5- Gin Tribe M =Artic 3 Race
6- Ozone Delta M

Performance in calm air (no activity): My mistake earlier. Sorry !

1- NIVIUK Artic 3 Race
2-NIVIUK Artic 3
3- Nova factor 2 S =Marvel 25 = Aspen 4 26
4- Advance Sigma 8 25 & Ozone Alpina M & Ozone Delta M
5- U-Cross S
6- Gin Tribe & UP Summit XC2


Performance at "trim speed" in head wind glides and turbulent conditions :

1- NIVIUK Artic 3 Race
2- Ozone Alpina M (It seems that it converts any movement to lift) = NIVIUK Artic 3 = Aspen 4
3- Advance Sigma 8 25 ( It has a very neutral pitch that allows it to stay on its path)
4- Nova factor 2 S (moves a bit)
5- Ozone Delta M (calm and always steady) & U-Cross S ( like on steroids )
6- Gin Tribe & UP Summit XC2 (Very close to the DELTA and U-Cross )


Performance at "first bar" in headwind glides and bumps :

1-NIVIUK Artic 3 Race
2-NIVIUK Artic 3 = Aspen 4
3-Nova factor 2 S
4-Ozone Alpina M & Advance Sigma 8 25
5- Ozone Delta & Gin Tribe & UP Summit XC2 M


Performance at second bar in headwind glides:
1-NIVIUK Artic 3 Race
2-Nova factor 2 S = NIVIUK Artic 3 = Aspen 4
3-Ozone Alpina M
4-Advance Sigma 8 25


Climb rate in weak but “difficult” conditions < 0.5 m/s (not homogenous thermals) :

1-NIVIUK Artic 3=Marvel 25= Aspen 4
2-Ozone Alpina M & Advance Sigma 8 25 & UP Summit XC2 M
3-Gin Tribe M =Artic 3 Race
4-Ozone Delta M & U-Cross S
5-Nova Factor 2 S

Brake description :

1- Nova factor 2 S (very direct and precise)
2-NIVIUK Artic 3 (Linear ,precise, agile)
3-Gradient Aspen 4 26 ( Agile ,moderate,linear,forgiving,smooth)
4- U-Cross S Direct and agile if the conditions are smooth, and a bit less in turbulent ,the glider must settle first)
5-Marvel 25 (precise,moderate pressure,needs a bit of work in turbulent conditions)
6- Ozone Alpina M ( A bit longer than Factor 2 and a bit softer , more precise and shorter than the Delta M and much better turning behavior)
7-Niviuk Artic 3 Race
8- Gin Tribe M & Sigma 8 25 (very close in handling ,a bit long but still agile)
9- UP Summit XC2 M (Long average agility to good)
10- Ozone delta M (Soft ,long and average precision)

Brake stiffness: 1 being low
1- OZONE Delta M ,Alpina M
2- ADVANCE Sigma 8 25 ,GIN Tribe M, UP Summit XC2 M=Aspen 4 26
3- NOVA Factor 2 S
4- NIVIUK ARTIC 3 25 = Marvel 25
5- AIRCROSS U-Cross S=Niviuk Artic 3 Race


Moving around in turbulence: 1 being too dampened
1-OZONE Delta M = Aspen 4 26
2-ADVANCE Sigma 8 25, UP Summit XC2 M
3-NIVIUK Artic 3 25 , GIN Tribe M
4-OZONE Alpina M
5-NOVA Factor 2 S
6-NIviuk Artic 3 Race
7-AIRCROSS U-Cross S = Marvel 25 ( moderate use of big ears)

Big ears efficiency:
Aspen 4 26 (very efficient in big ears) = Nova Factor 2
Artic 3 and Artic 3 Race (moderate ears )
Marvel 25 ( moderate use of big ears)

NIVIUK Artic 3 (RACE version)

 Test report soon !


https://picasaweb.google.com/110040226962521480605/NIVIUKArtic3RACE

GRADIENT Aspen 4

 Test report soon !


https://picasaweb.google.com/110040226962521480605/GRADIENTAspen4

UPDATE EN-D comparisons.

Launching:
1- Omega 8 25@94 = Magus XC2 = Poison 3 S @ 94 =Mantra 4 ML /MS (Very easy even in no wind)
2- GTO M & GTO Small
3- AD-Pure -Venus 2 M& S
4- Peak 2

A- Climb with a head wind (>15 km/h)
1- Mantra 4 ML @ 103 – AD-PURE M/S @ 93
2- Mantra M/S @ 93 - GTO M @ 103, Magus XC 2  25  @ 96
3- PEAK 2 24 @ 60 % of the load range
4- Omega 8 25 =POISON 3 S @ 95 = VENUS 3 M @ 104
5-. Venus 2 M @ 103

B- Climb > 2m/s without head wind
1-Mantra 4 ML @ 100= Magus XC 2  25  @ 96
2- AD-PURE M/S @ 93 = Mantra 4 M/S @ 93
3- GTO M @103
4- PEAK 2 24 & POISON 3 S
5-Venus 2 M =Omega 8 25
6- Venus 3 M

C- Climb in weak thermals (< 0.3m/s)
1-Mantra 4 ML @ 98 (lightly loaded)= Magus XC 2  25  @  96 ( very efficient)
2- GTO M @ 103 = Peak 2 24 @ 90 lightly loaded = Venus 2 M @104 (loaded) =
3- POISON 3 S (close difference)
4- Mantra 4 ML @ 103 (loaded) ! = Mantra 4 M/S @ 93 (loaded) AD-Pure M/S @ 93
5- Venus 3 M @ 103
6- Omega 8 25 @ 94

Glide at trim:
1- Mantra 4 ML @ 100
2- AD-Pure M/S @ 93= Magus XC 2  25  @  96
3- Mantra 4 M/S @ 93
4- GTO M
5- Peak 2 (very close to GTO M)
6- Poison 3 S @ 94 =Omega 8 25 @ 94
7- Venus 3 M @ 103

Glide at first bar:
1-Mantra 4 ML @100 = AD-Pure M/S @ 93
2-Mantra 4 M/S @ 93 = Magus XC 2  25  @ 96
3- GTO M @103
4-Peak 2 24 @102
5-Poison 3 S @ 94=Omega 8 25 @ 94 (very close)
6-Venus 3 M @ 103

Handling in still air:
1-Omega 8 25 (A delight!)
2-Poison 3 S = Magus XC 2 25 @ 96
3-Peak 2 24 (crispy and linear)=Venus 3 M
4-Mantra 4 MS @ 93
5-Mantra 4 ML @ 100 (Turns with a little delay)
6-AD-Pure M/S @ 93 (precise)
7- GTO M @ 103 (Turns with a little more delay)
They could be very close with a big difference between the O8 and the GTO M.

Handling and maneuverability in average conditions "with thermals":
1- Omega 8 25 @ 94 =Mantra 4 ML@ 100=Mantra 4 M/S @ 93= Magus XC 2  25  @ 96
2-AD-Pure M/S @ 93
3-Mantra R-10.3 S @ 98
4-EVO-X 24/ Peak 2 24/Poison 3/ Venus 3 M
5-GTO M

Now the most important is the “handling in rough air”, and I mean is that some gliders when encountering multiple cores and punchy turbulent thermals, will react to their own, because their inside pressure is more stronger than the controls and the brake inputs the pilot are inducing. The pilot below will be a passenger for a while till the glider settles in. The more time it will take, the worse sensations you will passively feel. And that’s not good.
Some in those same conditions will be more reactive to the brake inputs, the pilot underneath is inducing and could place them wherever he wants despite the rough conditions. And that’s good efficient handling.
It is always much better being the pilot underneath a wing rather being a passenger even though for a short period.

Handling in rough air:
1-Omega 8 25 @ 94  =  Magus XC 2 25  @ 96
2-Poison 3 S @ 94= AD-Pure M/S @ 95
3-Peak 2 24 @ 98 =Mantra 4 ML @100 =Venus 3 M= Mantra M/S @ 95
4-GTO M @ 103
5-GTO S @ 94

Comfort: (movements under the glider in turbulent conditions)
1- Poison 3 @ 96 (Unbelievable for an EN-D !! )  = Magus XC 2  25  @ 96
2- AD-Pure M/S @ 93 (very close to Poison 3)
3-Mantra M/S @ 93= mantra 4 ML @ 103
4- Peak 2-24 9/10 (very dampened, very close)
5- GTO M & Omega 8 25 @ 94 8.8/10
6- Venus 2 M 8.5 /10
7- Venus 2 Small 8/10
8-Venus 3 M
9- GTO Small 4/10

Easiness in flight: (In average conditions, where the pilot would be able to understand better the glider movements)
1-Poison 3= Mantra 4 ML= Mantra 4 M/S @ 95  = Magus XC 2  25  @ 96
2- Peak 2 24=AD-Pure M/S @ 95
3-GTO M
4-Omega 8 25
5-EVO-X 24
6-Venus 3 M
7-Mantra R-10.3

Stable ears in turbulent conditions !
1-Omega 8 25 = Skywalk Poison 3 =Mantra 4 ML =Mantra 4 M/S @ 95 (Stable) = Magus  XC 2  25
2- EVO-X 24 (Stable)=Venus 3 M Stable
3-GTO M (a little unstable)
4-Peak 2 24 (Not stable)
5-AD-Pure @ 95 (Not stable)
6- Mantra R-10.3 (Not stable)
 
Landing and maneuver approaches to top land.
1-Poison 3=Mantra 4 ML= AD-Pure M/S @ 93 = Magus XC 2  25 @ 96
2-Omega 8 25 = Venus 2 M & S=Mantra 4 M/S 2 93
3-Peak 2= Venus 3 M
4- GTO M
5- GTO S

MAC PARA MARVEL EN-C

Mac Para Marvel

And finally it arrived.

As with all Mac Para gliders this Marvel also made by Gin factory has an excellent finish.

The Marvel has an aspect ratio of 6.5 for the EN-C certification, and laying it on the ground shows clearly its sporty look.

Launching the Marvel with 10 km/h wind require a light but steady pull on the risers to get the glider above your head. So I think it could be a plus in strong wind.

In the air:

Getting next to similar EN-C gliders gave me immediately the feeling of an excellent climb rate, especially in weak conditions. That’s the strong point of the Marvel.

The turns are flat with a nice handling .It isn’t the most agile EN-C, but I think that was pretty enough to enjoy my flight.

In turbulent and nasty conditions the Marvel require active piloting to keep it over my head. The 6.5 Aspect ratio is present. Nothing out of the ordinary for an EN-C, but I will rate it as a high end EN-C in terms of control.

Performance:

Gliding next to some recent C’s and some 2011 top D’s, I can confirm that the Marvel is up there with the leaders in the recent C category, for efficient gliding, whether it is in headwind glides or in calm air.

The designer Mr Peter Recek has a small tip to get those Marvel pilots a better squeeze for their glide. Here it is:

We have managed nice glide increase by bending the C straps of 2-3 cm (on Marvel and Magus XC2) when flying accelerated 25-50%. With this shortening the speed is a bit decreased but the glide increases significantly.

I have tried that.

In calm or moderate air the glide feels like it has improved.

In “turbulent, shaky headwind glides”, it needs more practice to keep it leveled with the C risers, and as Peter said it was a bit slower.

Big ears are small, not really too efficient, and the glider felt a bit loosing “slightly” its homogeneity with a decrease in speed. They do not open by themselves and need a gentle long pull from each side at the time.

Conclusion:

The Marvel with its 6.5 aspect ratio feels and looks sporty like you are on an EN-D glider but with a passive safety of the EN-C certification.

Climbs are superb, and could be easily the best in the C category!

Its glide and surfing character will take you whenever you want, with no excuse or any blame for the glider.

It is the high end “C” glider you can train on to hit safely the D class.

https://picasaweb.google.com/110040226962521480605/MacParaMARVEL

MAcPara MAGUS XC 2

Mac Para Magus XC 2

The MAGUS XC 2 was already available in may 2011 to order, but I wasn’t able to get any Mac Para glider.

Now I have one to test fly.

The construction of the XC2 is superb. This glider is manufactured in GIN factory. In fact, putting the Boom GTO and the Magus XC 2 close on the ground, shows an identical sail finish.

There’s some Mylar on the leading edge and some plastic reinforcements.

Launching this glider with 6.8 AR is relatively easy for that category, and I didn’t find any thing unusual about it, but finding myself quickly airborne even in light wind take off.

I flew the XC 2 25 (82-100) at 97 all up, in some weak and other turbulent conditions, and here’s what I found:

The XC 2 move as a bloc above my head and it can be a bit disconcerting at first, because of the easiness of flight!

I thought a 6.8 AR will have to be a bit more twitchy! But it is not.

The feeling of comfort under the XC 2 reminds me of the Omega 8, which is smooth and predictable.

It does have some roll movements without being overmanageable or annoying.Just as it should to make the most out of the conditions.

The handling is nice but not too agile like some EN-C gliders .I think it has a very nice and coordinated handling for a 6.8 EN-D glider.

The glider feel taught in the middle more than the extremities, so that the pressure for inducing big ears is very light and the ears stays in place and needs a dab on each side to get them open.

Performance:

As with every glider this is the best part that the pilots will read with open eyes ;-)

After flying with some recent gliders in the same category, I found the Magus XC2 to be very competitive and the 10-figure number on L/D is manageable. The strong point of the XC 2 is its climb rate.

I can put this glider in the box of the special ones. Let me explain:

There are some gliders who doesn’t have the best glide ratio or the best climb rate on paper, but these gliders are always compensating for those numbers standing by their pilots …

I mean if I am going XC with some 12 L/D glider and encounter a low point with turbulent and difficult small thermal without the possibility to get the most out of it, I might land.

But the XC2 is among those gliders that really do compensate for pilot errors or thermal disorder, and stays level waiting to get up high again.

Eventually all gliders will land but my feeling is that with the XC2, the chances are just a bit better, especially in disorganized thermal activity.

Gliding at 50 % of the bar travel is easy with a relatively soft speed system, and at 100% the glide remain impressive with a pressurized taught feel !

Among the recent EN-D’s I have tested (8) ,the Magus XC 2 is indeed a special glider with balanced behavior !

It will be my favorite as the Omega 8 is.

Conclusion:

The Magus XC 2 is an amazing glider for EN-D pilots, or even talented pilots coming from the EN-C category, will find a glider that can help them achieve their goals in a smooth way.

Test report soon.

 https://picasaweb.google.com/110040226962521480605/MacParaMagusXC2







------------------------

EN-B comparisons ( update)

Inserting the AD Rise.

Mentor 2 S & Sprint Evo S, & Rush 3 M,AD Rise.

Most easy to fly:
1-Sprint EVO
2-Rush 3= AD Rise
3-Mentor 2

Climb rate in weak conditions .NO head wind (<0.2m/s)

1-Sprint EVO
2-Mentor 2 =Rush 3 if equally loaded
3-AD Rise



Climb rate in weak conditions with 15 km/h head wind and thermals (<0.2m/s)

1-Mentor 2 S (Efficiency showed)
2-Rush 3 M (have to be loaded) = AD Rise
3-Sprint Evo S ....


Climb rate in strong conditions:( With strong valley breeze)

The Rush 3 (loaded) and the Mentor 2 S have a good climb ,but i sensed an efficient forward thermal bite for the Mentor 2 as it can fit itself inside the core better .The Sprint evo will struggle a bit in strong valley breeze.

Climb in strong thermal (No drift) .. I wish all thermals are like that ;-)

All are equal in climb with the tendency of the Sprint Evo to stay inside the stronger part of the thermal,and could have the edge in those particular conditions.

Glide in calm air :
1-All very close


Glide in turbulence and head wind (Equally loaded)
This was done after many flights (now I am more convinced)
1- Mentor 2
2- Rush 3 = AD Rise (Should be 90% loaded to achieve good results)
3- Sprint evo


Overall efficiency in racing upwind:

1- Mentor 2 S
2- Rush 3 M= AD Rise
3- Sprint Evo


Glide at second bar in turbulence and head wind:

The Rush 3 , Mentor 2 and Rise are equal if there 's a little head wind ,with a stable profile for the Rush 3 at bar and the Rise . The Mentor 2 seems more efficient when the head wind is blowing.It can cut through with ease.


Conclusion:

The 4 are excellent gliders, The Evo has a very nice handling, the Rush 3 has a soft feeling underneath it like the Rise . Pilots looking for performance and handling in a mild way will love those three. The Rush 3 M has to be loaded to cut through head wind exactly as the Rise . The Evo has a big profile that doesn’t penetrate the strong head wind like the 2 others.
The Mentor 2 S still has the most sharp and precise handling, with “usable” performance in all conditions, no matter if you have a head wind, strong thermals, the Mentor 2 S @ 95 will cut through nicely and powerfully. It does have more roll response than the two others, and feels exactly like a high end EN-B glider, but for a good EN-C or D pilot, it is the cherry on the cake. Efficiency at its best in the EN-B cat.

Air Design RISE

AD RISE

40 long days of non-stop rain and snow finally came to an end giving us a break for 3 sunny days.

The RISE has unsheathed lines on the upper cascades and regular on the lower part. AD designed the RISE to have top performance in the EN-B segment, and is intended for XC flying.

Launching:

Pulling on the A’s, the glider comes steady above my head without a surge and I found the take off to be very easy.

In the air:

Having flown many EN-B’s before, I found that the RISE M like to be a bit loaded at 75 % of the weight range to feel it better. I was flying the M size at 102 all up.

I cannot describe The RISE as an agile glider but the turns in the thermals are easy to induce with a moderate brake pressure.

The pitch back movement of the glider in entering the thermals is dampened but does exist a bit.

I found the climb rate in weak thermals to be a bit less the Mentor 2 but average to well.

Climb rate in strong thermals are good.

Gliding into wind with a Mentor 2 at trim and accelerated showed a “nearly” close performance, with a much comforting ride under the RISE.

The accelerator on the RISE is smooth on my Impress 2 and I could push it easily all the way with a very good glide angle!

The RISE could be slowed a bit better than the M 2 for a narrow and tight landing.

Conclusion:

Air Design has created a nice high end EN-B glider which is intended for experienced pilots who want the safety of an EN-B glider + the top end performance in that category.

With those new performing EN-B’s long XC’s are now possible with a good level of security and passive safety.

WINDTECH HONEY

Construction: The glider is made like all new generation gliders, with light cloth and plastic red bendable rods on the leading edge like the ones used on the new NOVA wings.

Flying the M size 90-110 at 100 all up.

Launching the glider in every condition is very natural and easy ,without any hanging back or shooting forward. As easy as it gets !

Just after take off, the glider showed a spicy but polite roll behavior.

First thermal and turning this glider is quite nice for the EN-A category.

Its agile handling surprised me!

It can be steered easily even at the mid weight, and climbs are average to good. The accelerator is smooth and can be pushed easily, but its travel is short and limited to pass the EN-A cat.

Big ears are easy and non-event.

Conclusion: I found the HONEY to be targeted for talented beginners who wants to get nice handling and feedback, with an EN-A safety ! 

NIVIUK ARTIC 3

NIVIUK Artic 3
 

One of my favorite gliders at the time was the Artic 2,which I flew for a year .I appreciated its efficiency in the air and it’s beautiful handling. I was waiting for the Artic 3 to see what the designer has been cooking. And finally it arrived!

The glider has no Mylar like on the Artic 2. Instead light panels with plastic reinforcements on the edge of the cell like all the new generation gliders.

Take off is easy, as it rises smoothly above your head.

Immediately after take off, the Artic 3 shows a high trim speed, around 40 km/h, with a certain sense of security.
After some glide tests with some modern EN-C’s I can put the Artic 3 at the “TOP” of the EN-C gliders I have tested until this day, no question about it, especially at first bar.
The Artic 3 is a fast glider at second bar with a very competitive glide! And it seems to have also the fastest top speed.

Precise, linear, short, medium to hard brake pressure, reacts on weight shift and exceptionally beautiful, is what I can describe the handling of the Artic 3.
It has the tendency to turn flat and efficient. Lowering the brakes for a quick turn, the Artic 3 responds beautifully and when released, the glider quickly leveled to stay flat.

Even loaded at max on the 25, the Artic 3 will help you make low saves without loosing that weak thermal, by its ability to search forward without excessive pitch and roll, and that quality enable the Artic 3 to float better.

Big ears are made with the B3 lines, and they look funny, and applying the bar can achieve -3.5 m/s.

Conclusion: NIVIUK made an excellent job by creating a superb, very performing and balanced glider in the EN-C category .I think I am going to keep that one…

 

https://picasaweb.google.com/110040226962521480605/NIVIUKArtic3
-----------------

AIRCROSS U-Cross

Air Cross “U-Cross”

Unpacking the black and green glider on the take off is a scene to watch.

Magnificent work is done on the canopy with strings,ribs,cells,openings …a complicated work looking like an inside of a Swiss watch !

A true workmanship…

I thought I was going to the moon inside the NASA space shuttle ;-)

Regular lines are installed on the lower part and unsheathed on top.

Taking off with no wind would imply a steady pull with no releasing until it’s overhead, like its older brother the U-sport.

First thermal, and a medium brake pressure much like the NOVA Factor 2, which I thought i would never find a more agile glider, because it wouldn’t be usable! But I did.

The U-Cross has even more agility than the Factor 2 !!

Flying the U-Cross “efficiently” in thermals would require a refined skill in touching the brakes, as it is important to keep the powerful glider overhead for better coring!

The designer made such a superb work inside the canopy leading to a very pressurized and powerful

glider. And this will undoubtedly ensure that you won’t get a blow out easily if the glider stays over your head.

I could describe the U-Cross inside the EN-C Cat, where the OZONE Delta feels like a happy long haired cool dude with his pants lower than usual, with bent knees, hang loose mode in a “Rasta man”  way ;-)  !

The U-Cross feels more like an energetic 20 year old with big muscles, just popping out the gym, nose up, with a Red Bull drink in his hand, looking right and left in a fraction of a second and walking with his feet nearly touching the ground, just like a spring no matter if there’s no one to watch ;-) !

Going on a series of 360’s on the U-Cross has to be done surely before eating ;-)

And after some steep turns, it is ok to open your mouth in a rectangular shape and shout to your “Mamma”  :-)

The Guys who love that feeling will surely exchange their bed pillow with the U-Cross ;-)

Loaded at 95 on the S size, the climb rate in weak conditions is average.

The performance is inside the EN-C Cat much like the UP XC2 or the GIN tribe M ,or the DELTA M, with a faster trim speed.

Meeting the EN-C certification puts the U-Cross in a short speed travel that will enable it when fully deployed to increase at ±10 km/h, with a fairly good glide.

Big ears are stable, and reopen quickly.

https://picasaweb.google.com/110040226962521480605/AircrossUCross



........

EN-C comparisons

Hi,

I am starting a small personal comparison between some EN-C gliders for the interested:

Easiest to manage in the category:
1- OZONE Delta M
2- UP Summit XC2 M
3- ADVANCE Sigma 8 25
4- NIVIUK Artic 3
5- GIN Tribe M
6- OZONE Alpina M
7- Nova Factor 2 S & Aircross U-Cross


All being close.


Handling in rough air: (The one that you can turn even in rough air)

1- Nova Factor 2 and Artic 3
2- OZONE Alpina M
3- ADVANCE Sigma 8 25 & U-Cross
4- UP Summit XC2 M
5- Gin Tribe M
6- Ozone Delta M

Performance in calm air (no activity): My mistake earlier..Sorry !

1- NIVIUK Artic 3
2- Nova factor 2 S
3- Advance Sigma 8 25 & Ozone Alpina M & Ozone Delta M
4- U-Cross S
5- Gin Tribe & UP Summit XC2


Performance at "trim speed" in head wind glides and turbulent conditions :

1- Ozone Alpina M (It seems that it converts any movement to lift) & NIVIUK Artic 3
2- Advance Sigma 8 25 ( It has a very neutral pitch that allows it to stay on its path)
3- Nova factor 2 S (moves a bit)
4- Ozone Delta M (calm and always steady) & U-Cross S ( like on steroids )
5- Gin Tribe & UP Summit XC2 (Very close to the DELTA and U-Cross )


Performance at "first bar" in headwind glides and bumps :

1-NIVIUK Artic 3
2-Nova factor 2 S
3-Ozone Alpina M & Advance Sigma 8 25
4- Ozone Delta & Gin Tribe & UP Summit XC2 M


Performance at second bar in headwind glides:
1-Nova factor 2 S and NIVIUK Artic 3
2-Ozone Alpina M
3-Advance Sigma 8 25


Climb rate in weak but “difficult” conditions < 0.5 m/s (not homogenous thermals) :

1-NIVIUK Artic 3
2-Ozone Alpina M & Advance Sigma 8 25 & UP Summit XC2 M
3-Gin Tribe M
4-Ozone Delta M & U-Cross S
5-Nova Factor 2 S

Brake description :

1- Nova factor 2 S (very direct and precise)
2-NIVIUK Artic 3 Linear ,precise, agile
3- U-Cross S Direct and agile if the conditions are smooth,and a bit less in turbulent ,the glider must settle first)
4- Ozone Alpina M ( A bit longer than Factor 2 and a bit softer , more precise and shorter than the Delta M and much better turning behavior)
5- Gin Tribe M & Sigma 8 25 (very close in handling ,a bit long but still agile)
6- UP Summit XC2 M (Long average agility to good)
7- Ozone delta M (Soft ,long and average precision)

Brake stiffness: 1 being low
1- OZONE Delta M ,Alpina M
2- ADVANCE Sigma 8 25 ,GIN Tribe M, UP Summit XC2 M
3- NOVA Factor 2 S
4- NIVIUK ARTIC 3 25
5- AIRCROSS U-Cross S


Moving around in turbulence: 1 being too dampened
1-OZONE Delta M
2-ADVANCE Sigma 8 25, UP Summit XC2 M
3-NIVIUK Artic 3 25 , GIN Tribe M
4-OZONE Alpina M
5-NOVA Factor 2 S
6-AIRCROSS U-Cross S

Big ears efficiency:
They all have a usable big ears and good descent rates.

Conclusion: After all those testings i found that they are all very close .The difference and advantage that the Mentor 2 gave in the EN-B category versus its competitors,is not available till that moment between competitors in the EN-C category.

....................................................

ADVANCE IMPRESS 3 M

ADVANCE IMPRESS 3

My main harness for the past 2 years was the Impress 2+, which was very comfortable for my taste. Then came the Impress 3 M .

1.81 m and 73 kg inside the M size.

The construction of the harness and details are ‘impeccable”. It is very rare to find between harnesses such a jewel in terms of “finessing”  ;-) !

The harness impresses you to the level of handling it with respect. Swiss precision! ;-)

In the air:

In order to feel better the harness, I did make a flight in the Impress 2 + and the Sigma 8 25 @ 93,and then landed at the take off in the same conditions and switched to the Impress 3 M @ 90 all up.

Immediately after take I felt more roll movements than the Imp 2+ has. May be I am a bit skinny inside the M size.

Conditions of the day were like small 3m/s bullet thermals with 10 m “radius”. “Frequent on our sites”.

It was an exceptional day for trying to put the glider in its path using the harness.

My flying was long adapted to a seat board, and used to have a support point inside the Imp 2 when weight shifting, and that, wasn’t available in the Impress 3 as it doesn’t have one.

I think that time is needed to adapt to that feeling that I didn’t get used to it yet after 5 hours. It could be my stubborn head to adapt …

But I felt that “it rolls a bit quicker than I could weight shift to counter steer”.

Nothing out of the ordinary for that level of race harnesses, but just a bit more roll than the Impress 2 +.

The strong points of this harness are its superb comfort in the air by supporting the back and the hips + the light feel of carrying it on the take off.

The pluses:

A comfortable feeling, with nice back and hips support.

Lighter than Impress 2 by -3 kg.

A superb product with excellence in details and construction.

The minuses:

Has more roll in the thermals than the Impress 2. (I am 1.81m and 73 kg) May be a bit skinny inside the M that does explain the roll.

Doesn't have a "support point" when you weight shift (no seat board edge) like the Impress 2, but it needs time to adapt to its weight shift characteristics.

https://picasaweb.google.com/110040226962521480605/ADVANCEIMPRESS3M

More feedback:

Flying inside the harness i thought I'd make a small modification for skinny people, to limit the "slack" roll i was feeling.
After receiving some e-mails of pilots that found a similar feeling in roll movement,here's a photo of the modification that i don't recommend to make before contacting the pros at ADVANCE to be on the safe side. But it worked fine for me.
A small strap on each side about ± 16 cm (see pic) would suffice but i did install the trims to see at what point it will erase the roll excess.
I found that just a bit of pressure would be enough. No need to pull them hard. Just a slight pressure.

https://picasaweb.google.com/110040226962521480605/ADVANCEIMPRESS3M#5664862914670979250
 
https://picasaweb.google.com/110040226962521480605/ADVANCEIMPRESS3M#5664867032364545746




 
And i did install the neoprene cover on the chest strap to prevent the inside hard webbing's to hurt the chest on take offs when leaning forward.



...

NOVA Factor 2

NOVA FACTOR 2

Launching this glider is very easy, in strong or in weak wind.

In the air the glider has very close handling as the Mentor 2 S, very nice to steer ,and i could place it easily wherever I want inside the core.

I felt that the factor 2 S has a tiny less trim speed than the Mentor 2 S. When the conditions were smooth and consistent I found that the factor 2 S at 95 has a very nice climb, a bit better than the Mentor 2 S at 95.

Flying the glider in relatively turbulent conditions, mixed with head wind and light to medium thermal activity <2m/s, I was hoping to get much better biting into wind versus the Mentor 2 S and that would enable the glider to climb headwind.

In those particular not homogenous thermals and conditions, my friend with the Mentor 2 M, loaded at 103 was able to climb away several times. It could be that I am not yet familiarized with the new wing, but it did happened many times that day.

When the thermals got stronger but “smoother” the Factor 2 will keep its path in the thermal and have a good climb.

On glides in smooth conditions I found a ± 0.3 L/D better than the Mentor S.

The glides did get better “in smooth conditions” at bar.

The factor 2 S could have a very good glide at bar, but it stays in the “top” EN-C category only.

Flying with a Mantra 4 M, in head wind glides with some thermal activity showed a better glide for the M4 which is of course, still the best in the EN-D category.

Big ears are relatively stable, sometimes one side will flap.

The Factor 2 S has a very flat polar, and landing in narrow places require a bit of training.

The pluses:

Handling (superb)

Ease of use

Glide

What I was hoping:

Better climb rate in turbulent conditions

Bigger step in efficiency in difficult conditions over the mentor 2 S, which still is a revelation…


https://picasaweb.google.com/110040226962521480605/NOVAFACTOR2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YN531pfho9E

ADVANCE Sigma 8 25

ADVANCE SIGMA 8

The glider arrived to my doorsteps and in the truck for the take off. Having tried nearly all the Sigma’s, I was waiting for the 8th version.
 

Launching in high wind is relatively easy and I didn’t found and pitch forward. In nil wind the glider has a small 
tendency to stay a bit behind.

I flew the glider in 4 different harnesses. An impress 2,an impress 3, an ADVANCE lightness, and an Sup’air Evo XC2.

First flights on the Impress 2 at 93 showed a very gentle and comforting glider. It felt like I wasn’t on a hot EN-C glider. The pitching inside the thermals is nearly absent, and the roll movements are a superb balance between efficiency and superb comfort.
Describing the handling, it is definitely not playful as the Sigma 4,surely not dull as the Sigma 5, just a bit less than the Sigma 7,but I definitely could describe it better as the most “mature” handling a Sigma can have.I don't know if that's good or not for a Sigma.

Switching to the Lightness with 86 all up, (not adjustable chest strap at 50cm) with punchy turbulent conditions on the lee side, I was sometimes uncomfortable, and couldn’t get the glider to react to my commands promptly as I was re-adjusting myself inside the harness…I forgot how dramatically a harness can alter a glider behavior. But the soft Sigma 8 was always above my head with no collapses, waiting for me passively to re-adjust my seating.

Now flying it with the EVO XC2 at 90 all up, the Sigma 8 has the feeling of being a bit more stable than the impress2.
-Impress3... (to be continued)

Flying next to my friend Rony with his Delta L at 103 all up , showed a same glide or -0.1 (smaller size) for the Sigma 8, and with a little less trim speed of 0.5 km/h for the Sigma .

Flying in “homogenous steady >2 m/s thermals, the Sigma showed a nice climb rate similar to the Delta. But on the weaker ones <0.5 m/s the pitching back of the Sigma 8 forbid it to dig in those small thermals especially when there’s a light headwind. It feels that it is moving a bit upward but the vario wouldn’t bip. Otherwise in calm air and weak thermals it is still efficient even loaded.

Big ears are stable. Using the accelerator feels a bit harder than the Sigma 7 but has a relatively good glide.

Conclusion: The strong point of the Sigma 8 is its friendly behavior. Easier and much mellower than the 7, it could be easily a first EN-C glider for moving into the category.
The pluses:
Easy to handle
Comfortable
Doable big ears
Friendly user


I would have liked (Personal):
Much more biting in the weak thermals
Prompt ,more direct and funnier handling. 


UPDATE: After more hours :
It seems that after extensive flying on the Sigma 8 in different conditions,i am beginning to like it even more.
In turbulent conditions , smooth conditions, head wind glides , low saves, ....Big success in the category .
I can confirm that it's a very strong contender having a superb balance in its  "flying characteristics" as a superb package in the EN-C category.

Each time i fly this glider ,i understand more the R&D behind it.

https://picasaweb.google.com/110040226962521480605/ADVANCESigma8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljMdNcmQr7E

Another video will be posted shortly.

An EN-C party !

For the pleasure of the eyes and the feeling of no-gravity ...... A Sigma 8,Delta,Tribe,Factor 2,Artic 3 (when released) will gather for a dance in the sky. ;-) A full report will begin soon , Zi

GIN TRIBE

GIN TRIBE

After test flying the EVO Sprint ,the TRIBE came and I flew it in different conditions ,to get an idea about what’s behind that concept.

It is a simple 4 liner, just like the Sprint Evo.

Launching the glider doesn’t require any special technique.

After some time spent on the DELTA, UP XC2, Sprint Evo and the Mentor 2, I was quite relaxed flying the TRIBE. It resembles the XC2 and the DELTA in comfort, and accessibility, but the Tribe is a bit more maneuverable only inside tight cores. It feels like you can stop the glider inside the thermal and turn on a dime.

Where the DELTA has a longer brake response, the XC2 and the TRIBE is a bit shorter to feel.

It is not a super agile glider, but ok, a bit less than the Mentor 2.You can turn the glider very flat, and can bank it easily when lowering the brakes.

The brake travel is a bit longer than the Mentor 2, which is more direct to input, but when the TRIBE settle in a turn the radius is even shorter then the Mentor 2.

Flying the Mentor 2 and the Tribe in the same conditions reveals a much more relaxed ride under the TRIBE, which is an EN-C.

When entering the thermals the TRIBE pitches back a bit, before entering, much like the DELTA.

Big ears are stable with a bit span moving but usable easily at full bar.

The glide is similar to the UP XC2, and the glider is slower at trim than a Mentor 2 at the same loadings.

Using the accelerator is smooth and at first bar the glider gain some 4 km and have a good glide. At second bar the glide deteriorate a bit comparing to Mentor 2.

The TRIBE has an efficient climb rate, and it is nice to be able to core those small thermals in slow motion.

Accurate landings are a delight as you can slow the glider for small landing areas.

Conclusion: GIN made an easy glider in the EN-C category. With its brilliant climb rate and superb handling, those looking for those characteristics will cherish it.

EN-B pilots looking to upgrade will find in the TRIBE a soft comfortable ride especially if they were on a hot EN-B .
https://picasaweb.google.com/Ziad.bassil/GINTRIBE