BGD Base 3 M

BGD Base 3 M

BGD released its new B-class glider for 2025 and beyond. Here is the BGD webpage for all the specifications:  https://www.flybgd.com/en/paragliders/base-3--paraglider-2021-2272-0.html

Since I have already flown the Base 1 and 2, I can easily describe the differences in the Base 3. 

I flew the Base 3 M (75-95) at 92 and later at 95, to realize later that the optimum weight I found myself efficient in all conditions is near the top weight ( for me 94..95) 

Launching:

The Base 3 is constructed with excellent materials, Porcher Skytex 38 and 40 /m2, which are very good and durable. Pulling on the A’s is straightforward, probably a bit slower to rise than a Rook 4, for example, that I still have here with me.  Slowly but evenly, the rise is smooth, and that’s good is strong breeze, as it gives the pilot time to react. 

In the air:

Flying the Base 3 at 93 with my Impress 4 harness and getting the first lift.

The brake pressure is on the moderate to firm side, not hard. Just firm on the lower part after 40 cm of brake travel.  The Base 3 responds very well to the brake input, which needs in turbulent air around 20 cm to turn it into a punchy core, and sometimes lowering it a bit more helps.  The authority on the brakes is good for the pilot about adding a soft feel, like you are flying a mid-B-class glider. It feels quite accessible with those brakes that give you a strange but high passive safety feel.  The brake feel and handling reminded me of the Nova Mentor 7, XS light version. 

In strong air, the pilot can place the glider easily in any core. Overall, good handling.

The Base 1 had less structure homogeneity, the Base 2 was too accessible, and the Base 3 is even more! The maneuverability is even slightly better on the Base 3. The smoothness and mellow feel are very close. 

For instance, the Rook 4 and the Rush 6 feel more dynamic, and both of them are much less dynamic than the Maestro 2. (Just to get the idea)  

Flying the Base 3 in strong air, even at 91-92, is a non-event, but not efficient to dig through, that’s why I felt that it was best to fly it at 95, to be able to compare it with other gliders like the Rush 6 and the Rook 4, knowing that all others are loaded similarly. 

Climb rate:

Let's begin with the weak climb, less than 0.5 m/s, next to my competitors.  In those weak conditions, I stayed around 2 hours with my friends and got a pretty good idea. I think the Base 3 has good climbing properties in the very weak stuff when there’s no valley breeze, just smooth weak thermals. It can get along with the two others. ( I will update my B comparison as usual for the little details if needed) 

In a little stronger thermals (2m/s) with a present valley breeze, I found out there that it would be best to load that glider at max weight to keep up with my two friends.  After some time, I think that the Rook 4 was always getting that lift, followed by the Rush 6. The Base 3, of course, managed to get through, but needed more time.  

We did lots of glides all together, in different air, and the base 3 performed acceptably in the B class segment. 

Comfort and usability:

Among all the high B’s I have tested, the Base 3 offered me the most comfortable flying I have ever seen. It looks exactly and behaves like a mid B to say the least. That Base 3 is so comfortable to fly for a 5.7 AR glider that you think something is wrong! The roll is very dampened, and the pitch is nearly absent. Flying for hours under the Base 3 is exactly like flying a lower-class glider, to say the least. 

I think this is the strongest point of the Base 3. 

Ears are stable and easy to induce.  Speed over trim is around 13 km/h. 

Conclusion: 

Perhaps the Base 3 could be easier to fly than some mid B’s! Or at least it feels the same. BGD seems to focus a lot on usability, handling, and high comfort on the Base 3, and they have succeeded in doing so. 

Flying it in strong alpine air for many pilots could be quite comforting. Please consider flying it at max weight in order to get some benefits.