DaVinci Tango EN-C

 

DaVinci Tango

 let’s dance…

DaVinci is a South Korean manufacturer with a complete set of gliders from the A to CCC category.

The Tango is their new EN-C glider and my first DaVinci glider!

After receiving emails from pilots worldwide, I contacted DaVinci and I was able to purchase the Tango in S size (70-95). 

https://flydavinci.com/products/paragliders/tango/ 

To tell you the truth, I was a bit concerned at first about the new company, and I had silly thoughts in my rusty mind about what to expect…

Now the glider is in front of me and it is time to fly.  The construction looks really good. The Tango has 3 lines A, B, C, and a little fork on the C’s. It is not a hybrid like the Fusion for example. I thought also that it could be similar to the Flow Fusion. But it isn’t in any way. It is a 3 liner. Let’s proceed…

The glider is a mixture of Dominico on the upper surface leading edge,  which holds a shark nose, and Porcher 32 g behind, with also Porcher on the bottom surface. The lines are from Edelrid. Aramid lines are used all over the glider.  All the lines are unsheathed, but also they seem carefully chosen as they are not as thin as the competition, nor they are thick.  They seem to have a good balance for durability, and performance.

And I don’t think they will move quickly in time.

I flew the Tango at different loads, 89, 92, and later at 94 all up. The inflation of the Tango is as easy as a B glider. It rises quickly without any surge and the take-off is immediate even in nil wind.  Looking up I saw a super clean leading edge and construction! I was really amazed by the details and the sewing process. They were no crisp seen on this super finish leading edge. 

First turn and first satisfaction, at least from my part concerning handling. The brake could be described as short, linear, precise, delivering very good agility. The Tango can be steered very flat, and also could squeeze every lift very tight! That’s my cherry on the cake! The leading edge felt smooth in turbulence and I didn’t feel any pitch movements. The Tango enters smoothly even in rough air, with a slight pitch in turbulent air, but climbs really well upwind, and it seems that the internal structure is very homogenous. 

It felt easy to fly for a 6.3 AR, C glider. A bit like the Delta 4 for accessibility!  To make it more accurate, it seems very close to the Artik 5 I had, in terms of overall feel and handling.   

Doing some glides next to the Cure 2 M loaded at 93 showed me very close gliding properties! I can also confirm that the Tango trim speed is high matching the Cure 2 M.  At full bar, the Tango is really fast! Matching the loaded Cure 2 M.  What impressed me the most, is that at high speed the leading edge remained clean and untouched without any weakness or crisp on the materials. It seems that their new SN+ (Smart nose plus technology) is working well!  The SN+, is some kind of valve or tape on the leading edge, preventing the air from going out quickly while retaining the pressure in the nose. 

Honestly, I was really surprised about those performances!  To place the Tango in gliding efficiency, it would be inserted on the top 5 of the C category! 

The best is yet to come…The climbing properties of the Tango next to the C’s that were present seem really rewarding especially in weak lift. The Tango is indeed a floater. I could feel a very high efficiency at 92 all up in very weak thermals.  I can confirm that it climbs as good as the Cure 2 for example. 

I like to point out more accurately, that surfing into the wind had better results when I loaded the Tango at 95 all up. I felt that when loaded it could move a bit better through the airmass in the presence of a headwind. If flown at 90 all up it felt very slow in entering that airmass. So it likes to be loaded when you need to go through. At max load, the climbing efficiency was still excellent.

Ears are stable, efficient, and reopens without pilot input. 

Conclusion: My first encounter with DaVinci gliders seems well rewarded! The Tango is fast at trim and accelerated and likes to be loaded, with a very good package of climb and glide.

It is well comfortable for a 6.3 AR EN-C glider. Induced asymmetric with one A riser pulled, are soft, and super easy to stay on track with a fast reopening. The speed bar has moderate pressure and usable all the way.  

 My C comparison will be updated for little details.  

One thing is sure!  If you are looking for an EN-C, don’t miss to test fly the Tango!  

Mac Para Elan 2, size 24 and 26

Mac Para Elan 2 size 26 (85-102)

The Elan 2 is Mac Para new 2017 C glider. The leading edge has a shark nose, lower lines are sheathed, and the upper galleries are unsheathed. Again it seems that with the Eden 6 , Mac Para glider construction is being enhanced and quite neat. The leading edge looks very taught and its shape looks very clean.  

Launching the Elan 2 is easy for a C pilot. When pulling the A’s there’s no hanging back and no surging forward. 

I flew the Elan 2 26 at 99 all up with an X-rated 6 harness. The brake travel can be described as moderate to precise in the first part. 15 to 20 cm can steer the glider easily. Inducing turns inside thermals shows a fair agility for the Elan 2 ,and could be similar to the Elan 1 26 i test flew 2,5 years ago. 

I also flew the Elan 2 24 at 89 all up with a Forza harness. The 24 can be steered with only 10 cm having a moderate pressure. The handling and the way to turn the 24 is really nice. Much better than the 26 with quicker brake authority as usually seen on smaller gliders. At +15 cm and beyond, of brake travel, the Elan 2 has a slightly harder brake travel and its only used to control pitch movements.  

This new construction showed me a super strong leading edge. The feeling underneath is quite tamed. The leading edge felt like a solid structure above my head. I tried many times to pull the A’s on the 26, in order to induce frontals, and it was indeed a difficult task ! They need a super hard pull to get the leading edge into a collapse. 

In very weak conditions, with thermals less than 0.3 m/s this tamed feeling, erases the feel of hooking those tiny lifts. Exactly like the Delta 3 ML feeling. 

In stronger thermals, the Elan 2 26 hooks nicely, a neutral pitch in smooth thermals and a slight pitch back in turbulent ones. In overall thermal flying, the Elan 2 26 seems an easy and tamed C glider. A pilot on the Elan 1, won’t need any upgrade in pilot level, if he goes to the Elan 2 26. I also think that a good pilot on an Eden 6 ,will fly the Elan 2 26 easily. That’s the first strong point of the Elan 2 26.

The Elan 2 24 is more dynamic. I think i can place it in the middle of the C category ,not for its comfort which is still superb! but for its dynamic handling and energy retention. 

The way to steer the 24 can be described as precise, nimble and agile. I also felt something strange…Yet i was on top weight of the 24, i felt weak thermals better than being 98 on the 26. The leading edge breathes slightly better and floats well.  

Yet again on the 24 at 88 all up, i felt that sometimes in tricky conditions, i had some difficulty in sliding through the airmass with a pitch back at times that slows the ability to surf upward. 

Both gliders have some vibration through the risers in turbulent conditions. Felt more on the 24. 

I still think that the Elan 2 26 and 24 are indeed very comfortable gliders, probably slightly more piloting needed than the Elan 1, with lots of performance for the middle C category with only 6.2 aspect ratio.

Now the second strong point of the Elan 2 26 and 24 is the trim and top speed ! 

Flying the Elan 2 26 next to a Cayenne 5  XS which is already known for its fast trim, (similarly loaded ) showed me an impressive +2 km/h trim speed for the Elan 2 26 over the C5 ! !

Many glide attempts in calm air, showed me that the trim speed is faster + 2 km/h and the top speed is also faster by + 2 to 3 km/h similarly loaded ! 

The Elan 2 is trimmed fast !  That’s why in those small weak thermals -0.3 m/s a pilot needs lots of concentration to feel and hook them. 

The glide angle ‘in calm air’ could be ‘super’ close to the best C gliders available today.  It’s in turbulent conditions and facing a valley breeze, that sometimes i felt that the leading edge is reluctant to surf efficiently the airmass in order to move forward. Nevertheless, it remains among the top 5, (C rated) gliders in glide efficiency. I’ll update my C comparison soon for little more details .  

Induced asymmetric on the 26 are easy to maintain with a direct flight and reopen quickly. Big ears are stable at trim speed. With lots of bar, they slightly shake. They do not reopen by themselves. A dab on the brakes needed to reopen them quickly.

Induced asymmetric on the 24 are slightly more dynamic but easy to maintain a straight direction. Big ears are stable, both at trim and accelerated. They do not open by themselves and need pilot input.

The speed bar has a moderate pressure and the leading edge is still solid at bar. 

The glide angle at full bar is also very competitive to place the Elan 2 26 and 24 among the 3 top gliders of the moderate aspect ratio 2017, C category. 

pushing the bar is usable with a very solid leading edge at least at 85 % of the travel.  

*The pluses : + Comfort on the 24 and 26 , + speed on the 24 and 26 , + handling on the 24.

*The  average plus: Handling on the 26 (probably needs more weight to reach 102) 

*What i would wished for:  More leading edge efficiency in cutting through the airmass. 

Conclusion:  The Elan 2 26 could be one of the most easy to fly C glider. Easier and more tamed than the Delta 3 ML.  It’s better to fly it at the top weight in order to diminish as best as possible the pitch back in entry. The climb rate in weak is ok which is close to the Delta 3 ML i have tested earlier. The trim speed is very good for ridge flying, and the top speed for fast transitions.

The size 26 could be a nice C glider for B pilots going into that category for the first time.

  

PHI Allegro M (75-95)

 


























The Allegro is the new 2020 
EN-C glider from PHI.


















The Allegro is a semi-light glider, and launching even in nil wind is very easy. In stronger breeze Its as easy for a C glider.

I flew the Allegro in two sites, one at 800 ASL in moderate conditions, and on another site at 2600 m in strong conditions. I flew the WV, X-rated 6 at 92 all up.
I also flew it at 87 and found also that it flies quite nice at that weight! while keeping the homogenous structure.

The Allegro doesn’t seem to dive in turns when applying brakes in thermals. The turn inside the thermals can be described as an efficient, flat turn with excellent coring ability! It can be turned really tight inside the core!
The Allegro has the ability to let you make a stationary turn! So it's an agile C glider!
The brakes are relatively light in the first usable part while being precise with a linear feel. I just shortened them by 2 cm while keeping the 11 cm gap before the trailing edge reacts.
The Allegro enters in moderate thermals smoothly, without any pitch back. In stronger cores, the Allegro surges up really quickly! There are no useless movements that come from the glider even in strong air. I felt a certain high degree of safety under the Allegro while being not too dampened as my latest tested C glider. For example, the Delta 4 delivers more comfort and sometimes too much comfort! Everyone has his own taste for feedback. I personally would choose the Allegro for that feedback and felt! Simply excellent! Many of you readers know that I did church the Q-Light S for its handling. Now I’m an Allegro addict! 


On the Allegro, I was getting the right feel of feedback for an enjoyable flight even in turbulent and strong air. The Allegro moves in the air and let you understand every little detail, but with no excessive and useless movements. All those nice movements are coupled with a very efficient brake authority.

In the Cedars spot, I pass many times on the lee side with a dominant upper wind, just because it is sometimes the only way to get through those sections. With the Allegro informing me of all that’s going on, I was accurately placing it in the airmass with the brakes. Superb authority! I will say also that at all times, the Allegro stayed well inflated, and never a single cell collapsed. Only when I really was in some spaghetti stuff, a little tip finally whispered in my ear ”you’re deeply in the wrong place!”
I have to add also that the inside structure seems flawlessly homogenous. I didn’t feel any distortion or any snake movements in strong air.
The allegro is a dynamic C glider if you throw it around on wingovers..etc…but in XC flying it stays well above the pilot's head while informing about the air.

I flew the Allegro next to the Cure 2, and the Delta 4.
The climb rate in weak conditions is good, as I was always able to float and wait to catch the next stronger thermal. That feedback I was writing about, will save many pilots in weak air. The leading edge enters any lift without a back pitch. It feels like you are being slightly pulled upward and to the front.
In stronger thermals, it climbs really well! The allegro surges upward very efficiently in rising air.

In XC flight, the Allegro seems to surf the air quite well. When facing the valley breeze, it seems to cut through with the same character as the Maestro 21, but with more gliding into the wind.

Doing some glides at trim speed, I saw that the 6.0 Aspect ratio Allegro glides as good as the Cure 2, and super close to the Delta 4. At the full bar, the Allegro, and Delta 4 seem to have the edge in a similar glide angle!
The allegro M has a 15 km/h speed over trim, and at top speed the glide is amazing! The structure of the Allegro at full bar doesn’t seem to be affected. It just stays as solid with no visual fluttering of the cells.

My C comparison is updated for the little details if needed,

https://public.tableau.com/profile/ziad.bassil#!/vizhome/C(shrinked URL)rComparison/CGliderComparison

but I have to say that any pilot on the Allegro, and all the above-mentioned gliders, will surely make some nice and serious XC flights.
A pilot upgrading from the Maestro will find the Allegro a super easy C.

Ears are stable, efficient, and reopen quickly. They do not stick.

Conclusion: The Allegro with only 6 aspect ratio, delivers nice agility, a very good authority on the brakes, excellent gliding performance, especially at bar! Good in climbing, while having a large passive safety for a C.
I think a good pilot upgrading from a full season on the Maestro will experience a good evolution on the Allegro if he needs to upgrade.
I needed to find some minuses as many pilots commented that lately I only write good reviews…!
I searched to find any minuses…but I didn’t…sorry  Please do find something on the M size and pointed out!
Now Hannes must change his famous sentence (my specialty is the B category)! With the Allegro EN-C coming out, I think many of you will back me up after test flying that beautiful machine! 

Two videos soon 

Cheers,
Ziad

ADVANCE Sigma 10 (Authenticity at it's best )

ADVANCE Sigma 10  25  (Authenticity at it’s best) 

Here’s the new Sigma…How times go fast…I still remember my flights on the Sigma 4, 19 years ago !!!! high above ‘Cheval blanc’ in Saint Andre…Conditions were rough!  was a bit lost… heavy turbulence…Great memories  ;-) 

But that glider turned on a dime ! It was a dhv 2-3 at the time, and was pretty dynamic in frontals, but what a dream handling it had!

Back to the future now, with the Sigma 10 in size 25 ready to take off finally. As usual, the construction, the sewings, the finishing details of the Sigma 10 is similar to a Ferrari. Don’t expect less.

Launching the 6.1 aspect ratio Sigma 10 is smooth, easy, and without surprises. The take off is immediate.

First turn and my eyebrows are already lifted! The brake travel is very responsive, accurate, precise, direct, and linear. Much better progressive feel over the S9. I flew the Sigma 10 in different conditions, from the sea spots to the higher Cedars range, and i never felt anytime that it was reluctant to turn in any kind of thermic conditions. The Sigma 10 responded to my commands whenever i wanted regardless of what conditions is around. A super obedient glider and a pleasurable one to fly.  It can be placed exactly where the pilots wants.

This excellent brake authority is coupled with a very well structured glider. Whatever it is…optimized Sliced Diagonals, 3D Diamond Shaping, C-Wires…I really don’t know, but i’m very sure that the internal structure of this Sigma 10 is super solid, super coherent, and very efficient in turbulent air. I didn’t noticed any wrinkles on that surface…It seems flawless…Or i could be getting old and needs glasses  ;-)   

i flew the Sigma 10 ,25 from 93 to 97 and it was the optimum weight for any kind of conditions. This coherent solid feel was always present like a guardian. 

I also flew next to my reference glider in the C category, the Cayenne 5 XS at 92 all up. Doing many glides in active air together showed at first a similar glide at trim speed with a very slight edge in trim speed for the S10. The difference was more visual at 40 % of the Sigma 10, red marker. At that speed, with the Cayenne 5 XS matching it also, the Sigma 10 showed me a better glide by a small margin in calm air. In active turbulent air this margin was bigger. For me it was a first. Not one C glider before yet out-glided the cayenne 5. 

Full speed on the Cayenne 5 with the Sigma 10 matching that speed, they showed same glide again. Now the Sigma 10 similarly loaded has +3km/h more top speed. Pushing that speed in front of the Cayenne 5 for a while and releasing it. When the Cayenne 5 reached the Sigma 10, they were again at the same level. 

The best glide for the Sigma 10, size 25  is around 40 % over trim ! 

Climb rate in weak condition less than 0.5 m/s were slightly on the Cayenne 5 which seems slightly a bit floatier. As the thermal are more punchy and powerful, the Sigma 10 shoots quickly upward!  It’s a 6.1 AR, but it does really go up very fast reaching the top of gaggles.    

I noticed that each time the conditions were more turbulent, the Sigma 10, showed more it’s potential by cutting through and moving forward like no Sigma has done before. That’s why, i can confirm swiftly that this Sigma 10 is the best Sigma ever made when it comes to true performance!

Wait…That’s not all ..  :-)   

The Sigma 10 delivers a high comfort in active air ! This swift handling, the solid structure, will let the C pilot control it swiftly and accurately in active air. I can say any Good B pilot could easily upgrade on the Sigma 10 after two seasons on his glider. At it’s optimum weight load, this profile doesn’t pitch back in turbulence, neither forward. It just goes trough turbulence and move forward, letting it’s pilot comfortably relaxed. It’s an efficient glider in headwind or valley breeze, especially for 6.1 AR C glider. I’ll update my C comparison soon, but be prepared to see the Sigma 10 among the most comfortable ones.

There’s one more :-)

The Sigma 10 has one of the most efficient C controls a glider can have. It doesn’t react as a 2 liner, but really close :-) .  

I mean this glider is much more stable than higher rated ones, therefore, when on bar, this efficient C control, will help a lot by reducing any surge movement in active air. So stepping on the pedal is very easy and accessible.

Big ears with outer A’s move slightly but i can say they are stable enough and reopen by a small dab on the brakes or sometimes calmly by themselves. Big ears pulling the B3 and the stabile line works well also, but it’s better for this method to push the bar before pulling them. They reopen swiftly!

Conclusion: Advance has done a marvelous job on this Sigma 10!  They didn’t stretch the aspect ratio, keeping it simple and authentic as it should be. They worked hard on the inner structure and other details and they succeeded to deliver accessible ‘TOP’ performance in the C category. 1- 90% Comfortable, 2- 95% agile, 3- 90% efficient and usable top performance, plus fast enough for a C !  

Happiness emerges from the most simple things in life. The Sigma 10 approaches that philosophy with excellence. 

Fly safe,

Ziad

ADVANCE Sigma 11 - 22 & 24

ADVANCE Sigma 11 24

I received two Sigma 11 in sizes 22 and 24. 

Launching behavior on the S11 22 at 85 all up, and on the S11 24  at 94 all up is about the same. The glider rises effortlessly in light wind and when the glider passes 80 % it accelerates a bit. A touch on the brakes to keep it overhead is needed and the take-off on both sizes is quick.

At first, let's talk about the size 24.

The S11 size 24 (85-100) flown at 93 all up, flies well at that weight in all conditions, and later I found out that at 97 would be great in strong air. The overall movements of the S11 seem more dampened than the S10, especially the pitch behavior. The S11 pitch seems very calm and neutral in 80 % of the conditions.  The roll movement is also quite more dampened than the S10. Overall its seems to give very little in pilot demand for the C category. I think after test flying the Alpina 4 MS, the S11 24 overall movements are even calmer in the moderate conditions I flew in.  

While the S10 had a little spice, the S11, 24 is calmer in moderate conditions. 

The brake pressure is on the moderate side, slightly less pressure than the Delta 4 and much less than the Artik 6. To describe the linear feel and brake travel to the other C’s, I could say, that the Alpina 4 and the S10 had slightly longer brake travel, the Artik 6, 23 has shorter brake travel, than the S11, 24.  

The brake authority is high on the S11, 24 as the pilot can swiftly carve the glider in the air, and it is difficult to miss a thermal core. 

In biting through the air the leading edge seems to slow just a little before entering at 93 all up, but it enters with high efficiency. At 97 I found that the S11 24 has even a better efficiency into the wind.

Gliding next to a Delta 4 MS at 93 all up, I could confirm that the S11 24 at 93 has the around 95 % the same gliding power at trim and even at the S11, 24 top speed with overlapping pulleys.  The Delta 4 MS had still one centimeter to push. Like the S11,24 goes to 100, and 7 kilos were missing!  then the top speed will increase if loaded at the top. 

Again and again, gliding with very good C’s confirmed my findings that the S11, size 24 shares equally the best gliding of the C category. 

The climb rate of the S 11 size 24 flown at 93, in weak air seems also very good, as I was also next to my friends on their C gliders trying to see if there are any differences. Under the S11 the movements in very weak air ( +0.2 m/s) are very little in roll and pitch, and concentration is needed to feel the rising air.

 In stronger cores, it seems that the S11, 24 climbs also really well, among the best C’s in that matter.   

S11 size 22, 75/87 flown at 85 all up with a Genie light 3 M.The take-off is very easy as the glider inflates really well even in nil wind. In stronger wind, it goes up fast and a dab on the brake is needed to keep it overhead. The turning behavior with the Genie 3 is excellent. An excellent turning ability I can say! I could turn very tight with high precision. The smaller size of course is more dynamic in turns. One day the conditions were really tough at higher altitudes, and in turbulent strong cores, I felt that the S11 size 22 has a slight front pitch and the controls on the brakes lighten a bit even when pulling them at waist height sometimes.  A good high B pilot reported that day when flying next to me that the conditions were quite demanding and weird. The S11 kept a solid structure in those bad conditions without even a single collapse. But it kept me busy in the air, and I could have preferred a higher authority and linear “harder feel” on the brakes rather than a light feel, to control it in those specific and strong conditions.  I thought that I must top land and take another C to compare, but I was high and far to get back. 

The C steering system is very easy to use and very efficient to hold the glider movements in a moderate active air while on the bar! The leading edge seems more resistant to collapse than the S10 and it felt so smooth. I let the glider fly in front of me many times, without any issues. The induced frontals and asymmetries on the size 24 are easy to recover. Big ears are stable and reopen alone on both sizes.  The top speed with overlapping pulleys is around 14 km/h over trim.  For more information, I did update my C comparison for both sizes. 

Conclusion:  The Sigma 11 doesn’t have long rods, yet it is compact enough especially the size 24 in moderate to strong air. The overall solidity is more present on the new version. The handling and overall feel seem tamer in moderate air. The size 22 needs a bit more pilot control in heavy weather.  The turning abilities are superb, and the pleasure feel is high. The difference in brake authority between the S 10 and S 11 is that the S11 turns quicker with the less applied amount of brakes. The overall feedback is slightly less on the S11. Overall, it is a smoother glider to fly. I need to fly the size 24 more on strong summer days in order to be more precise, but the snow is still covering our high mountain range.  A light, compact to pack, high-performance C glider is awaiting you to test fly it :-) 

Queen 2 light size S

I already have tested the Queen 2 MS in normal cloth. Here’s the Q-light 2 in size S. 

The Q-light is delivered with soft skinny risers and the whole weight of the glider is around 4 kg.  The brakes will go only through a rubber loop to ensure their locking position. (no stainless steel or magnet holder)

Launching the Q-light, in light breeze need a slight pull. The light cloth helps a lot in keeping the glider overhead. For a C pilot, even in the strong breeze, the Q-light is relatively easy to launch in tricky areas.

I flew the Q-light Small (65-85) at 85 all up, with a Woody Valley GTO Light. 

In this test, I will compare the Q-light Small to the Alpina 3 Small. They both have the same weight range.  I also flew the Artik 5 size 24 (75-95) at 95 all up next to the Q-light Small that was given to a friend who also gave me his feedback of that interesting glider. 

Each time a new glider is out, it’s weird to read tests that go toward “this is the best glider..” kind of talk…But sometimes they truly are quite exquisite!  And test flying them will be a great joy. 

The brake pressure of the Q-light S at 85 all up is toward the light side. It resembles the Alpina 3 S ones at the same load.  The brakes are precise and the Q-light is very agile!  No matter what quality the thermal delivers, the Q-light can be steered inside the core quite efficiently. That’s a really cool feature in a glider that gives a swift, snappy feel through the brakes, and also a pleasurable and smooth one in turns!

The brakes are to be used moderately as sometimes the Q-light S will dive quickly into a turn. 

Saying that flat turns are also doable and efficient even on a loaded Q-light S.

What impressed my friend and I on the Q-light S is its ability to cut through the air smoothly and very efficiently for a C! 

Doing some glides next to an Artik 5 24 loaded at the top, showed me many times that this small Q-light has an impressive surfing power into the airmass. For pure gliding in moving air, I could easily confirm it’s efficiency for its amazing gliding properties that I could place high up in my C comparison table. 

The trim speed of the Q-light S at 85, is faster by 1 km/h than an Artik 5 24 loaded at 95. And also faster than an Alpina 3 S.  

The Artik 5, 24 and the Alpina 3 S are both super fine gliders, but they have this very slight pitch when entering thermals and surfing the air as I already mentioned in my tests. This wasn’t felt at all on the Q-Light S, as it was sliding through the airmass and moving forward with that fine quality to climb like stepping up on stairs. 

   

In my queen 2 MS test, I wrote that the Q2 climbs fast. The Q-Light S is also very similar. When catching a steady, well built thermal, the Q-Light S jumps upward like a spring, and it cores beautifully, responding to every pulled centimeter on the brakes.   

In very weak thermals, (0.2 m/s…0.5 m/s…) the Q-Light S is also efficient, like the Alpina 3 S. Probably the Artik 5 24 also loaded could have a slight edge probably be because of being a larger size. I didn’t have an Artik 5 22   to compare, but for me, the Q-Light S has already fulfilled beyond my expectations the excellent climb and glide for a C glider. 

The working load on the Q-Light S is slightly higher than the one on the Alpina 3 S as it moves slightly more in turbulent air. To place it accurately, the Q-Light is easier than the 6.4 aspect ratio, Skywalk Spice for example. For more details, please see the C comparison already updated.   (https://public.tableau.com/profile/ziad.bassil#!/vizhome/CGliderComparison/CGliderComparison)

The speed system is toward the light side, and the glide seems even more efficient after 5 km/h over trim. Controlling the Q-Light S with the C risers is quite efficient for a 3 liner. 

Ears are stable, sometimes they shake a bit. Smaller ones are more stable. They reopen quite fast.

Conclusion:  When the complete package of overall performance and especially pleasurable feel and handling and strongly present, it’s the heart that influences the writings.  

For me it was indeed rewarding, to test fly this Q-Light S!  A must test fly if you are looking for a light companion for a hike and fly adventures or XC performance flying. And of course a very strong contender for the sports class competitions. 

Happy flights,

Ziad

This is only my opinion. Make your own!

GIN Camino 2 size S- 85-100 ( A ‘different' Bonanza 3 !! )

GIN Camino 2  size S- 85-100  ( A ‘different' Bonanza 3 !! ) 

After reviewing the Bonanza 3 here’s the test flight of the Camino 2 in the same size. I flew the Camino 2 with the Impress 4 harness at 97 all up. 

Launching the Camino 2 is easy for a light 2-liner C glider. 

Details: In nil wind, the Camino 2 needs a slight but steady pull to lift it up, as there’s pressure on the A’s, slightly more than similar light gliders. But still quite simple to launch. 

In +10 km/h wind, it goes evenly with that exact same pressure. In + 30 km/h wind nothing changes, the same pressure and a steady pull with no overshooting or fast surges.  The Camino 2 S kept the same launching characteristics which I think is a plus. 

 New feel: In the air, I was immediately stunned by the very high calmness of that glider. While the air is turbulent with gliders around trying to keep their gliders overhead, it seems that the Camino 2 is flying in another (Gin planet)! 

The structure feels very taught and homogenous, with a high comfort feel, without being spongy or dull at all! For a 2-liner light C, this is actually unreachable yet in terms of feel and comfort. It resembles the Bonanza 3 ‘only’ in that matter.

I flew the Camino 2 S quite often at 95 to 98 all up, and delayed a lot the test, just to be sure what I was about to write because I thought it would sound weird…

Unlike the Bonanza 3 feel and efficiency, I am now 100 % convinced that the Camino 2 despite having the same numbers on paper, feels very different from the Bonanza 3 in its flying capabilities.  I really don’t know the answer to that! 

The Camino 2 S at 97 cuts through the air exactly like a fast train on rails. No structure movements, but still efficient going forward. Flying next to other C’s like the Artik-R, and Photons, I felt that I was in the same league, with that slight extra float-ability in some disorganized thermals. 

In turbulence and strong thermals, there is enough time to control the Camino 2 S. The reactions of the glider felt slightly less dynamic than the Volt5/Photon/Artik-R/Trango-X… The Camino 2 S is as comfortable as the Bonanza 3 with extras!

Saying that, the brake travel is on the moderate to slightly hard side in turbulent air where you need that extra pull to keep it overhead. 

With a moderate turn but quite acceptable agility to my personal taste, the Camino 2 seems to be the most efficient one to grab and hold the thermals.  The brakes deliver a high authority to place the Camino 2 inside thermals. 

The climb rate is incredibly good! One day, I flew next to my usual friends on Photons, Artik-R, Mystic, and Milo on a Boom 12 M, and the Camino 2 was climbing very well keeping up easily with the 2-liner C class. 

Next to a Boomerang 12 M, and in strong thermals, the Camino 2 has a neutral pitch with a positive attitude in embracing the thermals. It gets quickly inside the core and delivers a high authority on the brakes to steer it precisely inside the strong part of the lift.  Of course, once the thermals are sharper the Boom 12 has a clear advantage, but inside the 2-liner C category, and for the same size, the Camino 2 S is a very good climber.  

I did long glides in moving air and later in calm air next to the gliders I mentioned. I felt that at 97 the Camino 2 has a 1 km/h faster trim speed than a Photon MS at 95, or an Artik-R 26( 90-105) at 105.  The glide is among the top five C’s. 

The float ability however is among the best ones. 

The max speed is similar to the Photon MS. I did update my C comparison. Ears need a slight application to get them, but a stable way to get down. 

Conclusion: I am waiting for the Camino 2 XS size 70-90 to share my findings later. 

As for the Camino 2 S, I felt the optimum weight is around 96…97 kg. Perhaps in strong air and competitions, 100 could be your ticket to a podium!  It may not be the most dynamic, and perhaps slightly hard on the brakes, but that overall compact structure is delivering higher grades in most parts. 

High comfort, good glide angle, very good climb rate, good speed, handles smoothly, doesn’t lose much when hitting sinking air.  

Any good high B pilot wishing to step into that category or any C or D pilot searching for an interesting 2-liner C must test fly the Camino 2.