OZONE PHOTON ML

OZONE PHOTON ML 

Writing plain reviews, empty of small details, will not satisfy any more aware pilots out there, especially for those 2 liner C classes. That’s why, I will take time to explain every detail to the advanced pilots. It could be boring sometimes, but I really cannot write reviews as I’m doing a low B glider test… 

The new EN-C 2 liner from OZONE is already since 20 days in ML size. I am still waiting for the MS size to arrive hopefully next week. 

I have flown the ML size for some hours, from 100 all up to 104 all up, which is the maximum of ballast I wanted to carry.   

To begin with the construction, the PHOTON has exactly the same construction and details as the Zeno 2. In fact, if you see both gliders next to each other(pic attached) you cannot see the differences apart from the slightly wider shape of the Photon as its aspect ratio is 6.5 compared to 7.0 for the Zeno 2. 

The shape of the leading edge with the position openings is exactly the same as well the risers. For sure some internal structures and width or other things could differ, but the plain eyes cannot see those differences apart from the wider cord. 

Flying the Photon ML / X-Rated 6 at 100 and later at 104 all up, gave me a large idea and feel that I will share with you. 

The launching of the Photon in nil wind doesn’t need any for the C pilot. I usually don’t comment a lot about the launch of its normal, unless I see a hard point or something that requires a lot of effort in stronger air, but the Photon with its semi-light construction is easy to launch close enough to the Alpina 4. 

In strong breeze over 25 km/h, the PHOTON ML behaved quite gently for a C pilot and I didn’t find any dynamic reactions. Overall, easy to launch in all conditions.

 I had at the same time as the PHOTON testing, I had over here, the NK Artik-R, SOL LT2, GIN Bonanza 3, and UP Trango-X. (All one size smaller) 75-95—100.  This was for me a great way to give you more precise feedback especially since all were flown on the same harness but added some ballast for the Photon ML. Later I will mention the differences between the PHOTON MS and ML in handling, reactivity, and feel. Now I only have the ML. 

  One day it was windy, turbulent, and quite generous in thermals. So It was a good informative day to get a bigger idea of what to expect from the PHOTON  ML. I was flying it at 102 all up. 

First thermal the Photon ML didn’t have any pitch back or front at all. Felt like it was a calm glider in that matter and enters the lift with ease without any complicated pitch movements. 

The roll movements are also very comfortable similar like the Delta in MS size to be precise. Not really far from the Alpina 4, MS feedback If I remember correctly. Please consider that smaller sizes feedback is slightly more sensitive than larger ones.  So I think the PHOTON ML has probably 10 % more feedback than the Alpina 4 MS, which is really comfortable to fly! 

In all turbulence, the PHOTON ML felt quite tamed.

Now to give you a clearer explanation of what I felt, I will let you imagine flying an 18 sqm acro glider for a while, not smaller  ;-) and then switch to your regular C glider…Or perhaps…smoking a certain weed ;-) Everything looks slow around you. That is the slow-motion feel I got when I flew the PHOTON ML at 102 in relation to the airmass. 

It will fly OK at 100, but you will miss the point. 

Please consider that OZONE made the Photon for a purpose. And that purpose is not limited to a small local flight. It will surely perform very well…But IMHO, the PHOTON is a very well-engineered design carefully made for glide efficiency and you the pilot must ‘help’ extract those performances by loading it at 104-105 so that this special structure will show you its hidden magical efficiency to cut through and move forward like a top end 2 liner C !   You cannot perform on a race car with a semi deflated wheel!  :-)   That's the best way to describe it. 

Even in climbing mode, the Photon needs to move forward faster in the rising airmass. The climb rate of the PHOTON ML at 104 is still very good. In a weak climb, if it is flown at 100, it needs more time to get through but has no problem getting efficiently high. It’s just time and patience that are needed. 

For example, next to a Zeno 2 MS at 95, for one hour in thermals, I was always slower to dig through and the Zeno 2 was always two steps ahead higher, and in front. We tried again and again with the same results. For sure the Zeno 2 is another category, but just to tell you how it will behave at 100.  At 104 things got a lot better, I was able to ‘have’ a little more chance to keep up, especially in those long glides with lifts in between as the loaded Photon was moving forward better, especially at half or even at the full bar! And that is the strong point of that glider when you are using the speed system.  It moves forward through the lift and guts! While other gliders could get pinned or slowed. 

I also did lots of glides with all the new 2 liner C’s and saw that the ML size has a slight upper hand, in transitions, at full bar, but this gap was larger in difficult conditions, as the PHOTON ML was gliding on rails with a solid one-piece homogenous structure. I will hopefully try with a loaded Photon MS size as soon as it is available.  

The B steering has a moderate feel, very efficiently usable. While on bar, I was completely at ease and quite efficient to keep the glider stable with the B controls. I will update my C comparison for all the details after I fly the MS size.

Handling:

The PHOTON ML even at 104 could be considered as having moderate agility. The trailing edge reacts after 10 cm of gap. The brake travel is a bit long, But that glider flies at best, hands up and doing that, it could be steered with less and less brake input. So getting used to it, I could steer it with only 15 cm with weight shift after the gap without braking the outer side.  It turns flat and narrow sometimes.  

To get the first wing over you must insist on a weight shift. 

Ears with outer A’s are stable on the ML size at 102 and reopen with little pilot assistance. Ears with outer B’s are stable and reopen quickly. A good way to get down. 

Conclusion:

I will try the MS size, which I am used to flying from 90 to 95 which could be more dynamic a bit. But for now, these are my humble thoughts on the PHOTON ML.

The PHOTON ML is a very calm, easy, stable, and homogenous 2-liner C. The overall performance in glide is very good for that category. Much better than the Mantra 7especially at the speed bar and also racing upwind. That ML size was way easier to fly than my Light Mantra 7 MS, and closer to the Alpina 4 with probably around  +10 % max more pilot control. 

Will write my impressions on the MS when it will arrive.  

UP Trango-X

In 2016, UP launched the Trango X-Race, with a 7 aspect ratio.  If you have already read my test, then you would probably know that I fell in love with the handling, and overall performance at the time. 

Many EN-C gliders have emerged since then, but I can assure you not one has satisfied my spoiled and picky nature for breaking authority and handling. Yep…That’s me…

Until PHI got the Maestro 2 as an EN-B size 21 and flew at 95 all up, to find a slightly similar feel and I was really happy to fly it and still, just to feel that handling taste. 

Now UP has released the 2023 Trango-X in the EN-C category, and my only concern even in my dreams was: “Please I really hope that they didn’t change that brake authority and feel…”

It was indeed in my mind all the time! Believe me!  :-)

And there it was…I opened the box, the Trango-X in SM size 85-100. 

The Risers… Franta’s configuration (Frantisek Pavlousek ‘designer’)…Since he left Axis a long time ago.  At that time I had a Venus 1 and 2 and the RX version. The risers configuration always had the B risers longer than the A, and C risers or D at the time.  The Venus 2 S size in 2009 was for me a favorite. 

It was gliding much better than very well-known brands at the time, and few pilots tasted that, unfortunately…

Now came the 2 line era! The Trango-X has been released with a hybrid option 2.5 Lines. 

If you are that special pilot who is looking only for a pure 2-liner C glider and just reading this test for fun…Then you are completely mistaken my friend! 

Read further down to see what the surprise UP has prepared for you! 

UP uses a mix of the excellent Porcher Skytex 32 Universal and Porcher Skytex 27 Classic II on top and bottom, with a mix of Edelrid 8000U-090/070/050/230/190/120 (Aramid unsheathed) / Liros DC60 /120/100 (Dyneema unsheathed). 

The construction and details are really good with a total weight of 4.5 kg in a semi-light build. 

As you see in the picture the leading edge has a pointed shark nose and small openings. 

UP opted for a 2.5-line riser setup. 

Launching the Trango -X with no wind is very straightforward and very easy to lift with no hard point. In the stronger breeze, no shooting forward with a little brake. 

I flew the Trango-X from 93 to 97 and it flies really well at 93 without the feel of less load. At 97 it's also perfect in strong air! 

Still on my beloved X-rated 6 XL. First turn….A WIDE smile on my face !!! YEEEPEEEEEEEEEEE !!!  UP didn’t fail me by the delivered brake authority and feel !! The brake pressure is on the moderate side, with 10 cm to steer the glider and from 10 to 20 cm a super ‘linear’ input very precise to put the Trango-X  ‘as you wish’ option!  

That’s what I’m talking about! A really nice steering glider gives good authority for the pilot even in strong air, and a very pleasurable one. 

The feedback has a slightly mixed feel that comes from the brakes 30 % and 70% from the glider. The perfect blend! 

Behavior in strong air:

The Trango-X is easier to fly than its predecessor the Trango race, needing less than 30 % pilot input that was required by the older version.

It needs around 10 % more active pilot control than the Artik-R.  But that spicy and balanced feel under it will be cherished by the educated pilots that would fly it! 

The roll movements are on the moderate side, delivering exactly what a pilot must feel.  The pitch has a slight and smooth pitch forward. 

Climb rate:

In surfing that airmass the Trango-X doesn’t have a pitch back at all, nor a neutral pitch. Just a very slight forward pitch into the airmass! A delightful feel when flying through the air! 

The climb rate in strong thermals is really good. I flew with my friends on the Artik-R 23, and we were inseparable in weak and in strong thermals.  Just to let you know that the Artik -R climb is really good, and probably just slightly more efficient in climb rate than the Photon, in weak air. Yes, there was also an Ozone Photon ML flying near all the time…As I was also test-flying the Photon with Trango-X, Artik-R, LT2, and Bonanza 3. at the same time. 

Alternating gliders convinced me that the  Trango-X climbs superbly well!  

That feel of the Trango-X leading edge that pulls you gently into the thermal without any pitch-back back is a delight!  You can feel that efficiency in surfing the air. When you fly a pleasurable glider, that urge to find thermals just to get the ‘pleasure of the turn’!   Now you know that I’m hooked ;-) …

Ok, that’s it…I’ll stop. 

Let's talk about the surprise! I mean the glide…

One day, there was a strong north headwind with a really high cloud base for the day. It was the time to test the ability of the Tango-X versus the other pure 2-line competitors! 

While my friends on a Bonanza 3 S flown at 94, Artik-R 21 flown at 94, and Photon ML flown at 102 all up, were flying also near. 

 We decided to go on a glide facing the wind, at trim and then at the half bar and later on full bar… The glides were repeated 3 days in a row to be sure before I write anything. After all, this is a 2.5-line configuration glider and anything written should be very accurate, at least for my personal peace of mind.

What would you think of the outcome?  

After many glides wing tip to wing tip, the Trango-X with the 2.5 line configuration is nothing but excellent right next to the top ones of that EN-C category …believe it or not. 

At half bar, it is also very competitive. The C riser controls work well in controlling the glider movements. They have a moderate to hard feel and are quite usable. The pressure is harder than the Artik-R ones or the Photon. 

At full bar, the Trango-X has 18+ km/h over the trim with an incredibly good glide angle!  The speed bar is heavy on the second bar. The leading edge is still solid at full bar. 

The details will be published on my 2-liner C comparisons, for tiny details. But prepare to see it very close to the top ones! 

Ears can be done with outside A’s and reopen without pilot intervention, or with outer B’s which opens quicker. Both are efficient to get down. 

Wingovers on the Trango-X can become very high after two turns! Showing its playful behavior. 

Conclusion:

The Trango-X has an excellent and efficient glide through a moving airmass and converts any lift to climb without slowing, bumping, or losing the glide. Sometimes it is difficult to describe that feeling, but I can say that the UP TRANGO-X surfs the air with an efficient ‘attitude’ … It likes to fly. 

UP has created a 2.5-line EN-C glider that can easily compete in climb and glide flawlessly, against all the current 2 liners I am currently test flying.

All that with delightful and pleasurable handling. 

It would be a shame if at least you can test fly that glider if it suits your pilot needs! Don’t let it slip your ‘list’ like that old 2009 Venus 2 did to many! 

I found out that the optimum weight for that glider is around 95…96. 

Happy testing !! :-) 

Ziad

Felipe Resende (FLOW) Interview

Dustoftheuniverse:  Felipe, Can you please tell us about FLOW's new releases? 

Felipe Flow Para: 1- This year alone we have released 5 new gliders. Cosmos 2, Panorama 2, XCRacer2, Cosmos Power2, and RPM2 - we are just about to release the 6th, on the Mullet. 

It's the biggest glider release we have done since our conception.

We finally have a factory we can work with and not hold us back. We had many problems in the past with the manufacturing facility in Thailand. The owner was really making our life hard.

Now we can do everything we want with the proper support, so we will be keen to release exciting products in the future.

Dustoftheuniverse:

Can you please elaborate on each glider?

Felipe Flow Para: 2 - The cosmos 2 is based on the Cosmos 1 but we improved a lot of things.it is a low and basic B for new pilots and cools to use. We already improved the handling, so the handling is more direct,.version 1 had long brakes, but the Cosmos 2 is very responsive and more fun to fun, more direct, and requires less brake travel to thermal.

We used the same risers as the Freedom 2 ones, so pilots can practice rear riser steering, and it's more solid on the bar, so the new airfoils are a bit more collapse resistant.Cosmos 2 is a big improvement to Cosmos 1

The Cosmos Power2 is a completely different glider from the Cosmos 2 while having the same name, but the power is a dedicated PPG wing that has a dedicated airfoil and a different Arc, and a different line plan.

The Medium is an intermediate glider for the new pilots and the smaller sizes are for advanced pilots because we have 19 with higher wing loading for more experienced pilots this glider versus the older version, we improved the top speed with a new airfoil, even though you pull the A lines the glider doesn’t collapse and it is extremely collapse resistant, and extremely pitch stable,. It gives good efficiency at a low angle of attack. It's like a reflex airfoil but extremely efficient. The same applies to the RPM 2 but with a higher aspect ratio with further back attachment points in the full-speed configuration when you have trim open and full-speed engaged, basically, all the load is on the A lines,  and it is almost impossible to collapse it. 

.And lastly, we have one final glider we are about the releases and that’s the Mullet and that’s a glider that can change the angle of attack just by moving your hands up and down. It flies the same as you fly a hang glider. Here in Australia, we have lots of coastal sites, and traditionally the glider flies in the morning and hang-gliders fly in the afternoon as the wind increases, so the hang-gliders can do amazing dives, the paragliders are just watching, and everything changed with the mini wings, but now also everything changed with this new concept/technology. There are lots of manufacturers that have one in the market already, our is similar, so the difference is the feel, and we use the same airfoil that the PPG  has as described above. You can pull the A lines but you couldn’t collapse the glider. When hands up the glider dive, and you need an extremely collapse-resistant airfoil that can tolerate negative angles without a collapse. We understand that pilots would fly that glider inland on strong wind days, but we are confident that on this glider we can push in thermic components, and it flies the same as it flies on the coast. You can dive and convert energy back to height. It is an incredible experience to fly like that, and it is a game changer. Once you fly a glider like that in strong id, you can’t fly anything else again, cause it’s way more fun to fly gliders like that compared to mini wings or normal paraglide

Dustoftheuniverse:  What about the XC -Racer 2? 

Felipe Flow Para: 3 - The XCRacer2 is definitely easier to fly. Nice turning and handling into thermals, one can use more brake input and be more in control and feel more comfortable when conditions are turbulent. Somewhat the brake input is more precise and intuitive, one can definitely notice it offers more refined handling. Also at speed, the glider feels more solid. rear riser steering has similar pressure and feels to version one.

It obviously has better performance and glide at speed and higher top-end speed in comparison to the previous version.

During our competition season here our pilots noticed that for was easy to stay on top of the gaggle waiting for the start gate, so it is a good sign the glider climbs well and offers good "float-ability"

Dustoftheuniverse:  Did you name your next C, 2-liner? Any release dates?

 The EN-C 2 liner has two names and we still didn’t decide on what name we are going to go XC yet … The glider is basically finished and we just finishing all the paperwork. We have just released 6 new gliders this year, so we have lots of things to catch up on, including manuals, marketing photos, certification paperwork… there are a lot of things before...

We started the 2 liners EN-C in 2019. So we have quite a few prototypes and we just have the final version. It is good that we have some extra time because we fixed the airfoil for the XC racer2 and I’m using the same airfoil for the EN-C 2 liner which is an incredible airfoil with similarities to the PPG glider that doesn’t collapse on the tips as it shows a strong airfoil.

Dustoftheuniverse:  Anything to add for the panorama 2 characteristics versus the first version? Two sizes?

Felipe Flow Para:  The main feedback we had on the Panorama1 was that it had excellent launch inflation and landing, but it could be more dynamic and fun in the air.

We believe we kept good qualities of launching and landing but improved the handling in the air, it's now more fun and exciting for the pilot to fly... The feel is of a solo wing.

Also, we managed to certify with a weight range of 90-220kgs for the size 41. So now many professional tandem pilots only need one size to fly with kids and light passengers as it is now certified at 90kgs

We are now using more Skytex38 on top surface without compromising the overall weight of the glider which remains similar to the previous version, an incredibly light yet durable tandem at 6.8kgs

GIN Bonanza 3 S (85-100)

GIN Bonanza 3  S  (85-100) 

The GIN Bonanza 3 is the 2023-25 new EN-C, 2- liner glider that replaces the Bonanza 2 which was a 3-liner with a 6.4 aspect ratio. 

The Bonanza 3 only has one A and one B. It is a pure 2-liner with a 6.3 aspect ratio and equipped with GIN’s new wave leading edge that was implemented on their CCC glider the Boomerang 12. 

GIN uses on the upper surface leading edge:  Myungjin MJ40 MF and Myungjin MJ32 MF and on the Lower surface: Porcher Skytex, 27 g/m².

The lines are a mix of:   8001 / 050 / 070 / 090 / 130 / 190 / 230 / 280 / 340  (unsheathed aramid)  

The overall construction and details are really nice with excellent workmanship. 

Launching:

The Bonanza 3 launches easily in nil wind and the rise is straightforward, without any hard point or delay. In stronger air above 20 km/h, it is also very easy to launch and quite manageable in correcting it if needed, and the take-off is very quick. 

I flew the Bonanza 3 from 94 to 97. In all those weights it will behave very taught and forgiving.  The B3 was flown in weak air to some stronger air, and finally, the feedback from my friends and I was unanimous by the easiness and high comfort of the Bonanza 3 in active air. It resembles the comfort of the Alpina 4 if any pilot had a run on it.  For a 2-liner it has similar comfort as to the Volt 4 with an even more coherent and solid structure. 

I found out the stall speed is very low as if the glider is telling you or informing you that you have a little more to hold…And in tight turns, when you apply a bit more brake impute into a turn, the Bonanza 3 informs you that you also have a margin before a spin! It is for me a new feel under that glider, and I can only say that the wave leading edge has something to do with that specific feel, never felt before on any other wing. 

The stall and spin will eventually happen, but there’s something that delays them if you listen carefully to the glider. 

 The turning behavior and brake travel feel exactly similar to the Bonanza 3 which was excellent, but without the excessive movements that were on the B3. The brake travel is short to moderate with a more forgiving length. The Bonanza 3 responds well to pilot input in all conditions, even in nasty ones, and the authority on the brakes is really high giving the pilot that extra feel of control in moving air. The brake could be described as, linear and responsive thought out the range. To give an example, it resembles the Alpina 4 brake response but with a more linear feel.  Overall it is quite agile.

The Bonanza 3 doesn’t have pitch behavior at all. no back pitch nor front. The roll also is very balanced without being dull or dynamic. That’s why it is so comfortable in thermals. In strong cores, the Bonanza 3 slows a bit before entering, slightly more than the Artik-R but climbs well when it enters. Some gliders surge through the thermals and climb going forward. The B3 is a calm glider in that matter.  Flying it at 100 could improve the faster entry in stronger air and windy days. But even at 95 all up, it climbs well in overall conditions. 

Climb rate:

One of the strongest points of the B3 is the climb in very weak thermals, as it showed me a very good float ability in those small thermals. I think it is as efficient as the LT2 in that matter, putting it among the top gliders' efficiency in weak thermals. 

It feels as if the B3 holds into the weak thermal and embraces it. 

Comfort:

Another strong point is the comfort level it offers. It could be probably that wave leading edge, that gives you a feel of a very secure and strong passive safety.

The difference over the Bonanza 2 other than the overall performance of climb and glide angle especially at speed, is the amazing comfort of that 2-liner C. 

Glide angle:

I did many glides with the Bonanza 3. glided with the Zeno 2, which I will immediately say that the Z2 is from another further level of glide efficiency. Of course, I am not comparing it to the Zeno 2! But it is just an idea to know.

I also did glide with the Artik-R same size and wing load, and also with the UP Trango-X also the same size as the B3 and the same load. The glide angle at the trim and at bar is very close to the new 2 liners like the Volt 4 for example. I will update my 2 liner C comparison for the little details. But as far so good for the overall package it offers. 

Ears:

Ears are doable with outer A’s, and also with outer B’s. In both cases, they are efficient and easy to use with a little more pressure if you use the A-lines. But with hands high and a bit more persistent, it will close well. The opening is sometimes without pilot intervention. 

Pleasure under the Bonanza 3:

The moderate brake pressure and brake structure offer very nice agility and authority on the brakes giving the pilot an enjoyable ‘cool’ experience under the B3 making it pleasurable to fly for that specific category.

Usability:

Please keep in mind that it is not a high-B glider…The Bonanza 3 is a 2-liner C model, for that specific targeted group of pilots. But it will require no more than a C pilot under it. 

For example, a Bonanza 2 pilot would find it easier to fly than his old model.  Pilots on low-rated B gliders would be better to get a season or two on their high Bs before going for the Bonanza 3 which is logical for a safe evolution. 

B steering:

The B steering on the B3 while stepping on your speed bar is a nice experience with that efficient tool to keep the glider overhead. The pressure is moderate and balanced without being hard or soft. Just what it takes to have long XCs without being tired. 

Speed:

The trim speed is close to the Artik-R. The top speed is very usable, with moderate pressure on the speed bar delivering around 12 km/h over trim at 1000 ASL with a solid leading edge. 

Conclusion:

Again, manufacturers are trying to deliver easy 2-liner C machines for newcomers to that class without being overwhelmed by excessive feedback. The Bonanza 3 follows that path with its pleasurable and comfortable feel.   An EN-C pilot would feel at home under it. 

NOTE: 

 Please remember the C class requirements:

EN-C Certified Paragliders are designed for intermediate pilots who possess good “active piloting” skills and are quite familiar with recovery techniques. The pilot must fully understand the implications of flying a glider with reduced passive safety. Pilots should possess an advanced rating or certification, and have logged HUNDREDS of flight hours in ALL conditions (especially thermic). An “SIV” or “Advanced Maneuvers” Clinic should be completed by pilots flying EN-C Paragliders.

NIVIUK Artik-R   size 23

If you already read my previous test about the Artik 6 , then you surely felt that I really appreciated that overall complete glider. Now as the C certification allowed the use of collapse lines and other changes, Niviuk released to the market their new C class model, with its 2-line version and with a 6.5 aspect ratio. 

I have flown the size 23 which is certified from 80-95, and NIVIUK recommends the optimum flying weight of 87-92.

I flew that glider at 88- 92- and 95 all up on my X-rated 6 harness. 

The Artik-R has a really nice construction and the finishing details are really impressive. I think NIVIUK has made it a step further in delivering a really neat high quality product which is clearly shown when you unbox it. 

Launching :

Pulling on the A’s on the Artik-R at 92 all up, gave me a little heavy feel at the beginning of the rise, than normal in the middle rise, with very easy take-off behavior even in no wind. The take-off is immediate without the wing surging in front.  In a stronger breeze, the Artik -R can be easily mastered by the brakes, and there is no surging forward for a C pilot, rather than an immediate take-off. Overall take-off behavior is quite nice. 

Pitch and roll stability:

In the air, and later in different conditions, the pitch felt very stable, getting inside the lift is super comfortable even smoother than the Artik 6 which had a slightly more positive pitch feel. The Artik-R slows very slightly when encountering thermals. The roll stability seems very close to the Artik 6. Overall they felt close in comfort with probably +10…15% pilot demand in turbulent air for the Artik-R.  It is not summer yet to be precise, but it feels quite balanced. 

 The Artik-R has a taught and solid leading edge. Trying to pull the A’s showed me a logical heavy pressure, as the A’s are far back.  

Climb rate:

I flew the Artik-R in a very weak lift (+0.3 m/s) with no wind influence, at 93 all up, and I was really efficient with the best C gliders, or even D’s, to confirm after a while that the climb is in weak is really good! The Artik-R could float really well! In stronger thermals or with more wind, the Artik-R behaves calmly in pitch, and needs slightly more time to enter, but with a fairly good climb rate for the category.

Gliding power:

For two days, I had the privilege to fly with my friends on 2-liner C gliders!  Yann, on a Volt 4 M size max 102, Elie and I  (alternating) Artik-R and LT2. 

After many glides, we all had the same conclusions! 

The Artik-R holds now the crown having the top glide ratio for the 2 liners by a small margin, especially at full bar which is impressive!  

So I decided to try another very good 2-liner EN-D glider. (A Gin Leopard. But a bigger size ‘M’ was only available! ).  I know it is not fair to try it with the higher class but just an idea for me and also many pilots suggested that I try…

To be precise, the glide in ‘calm air’ at trim is similar. The glide at bar seems also incredibly similar!  The Artik-R showed me a true gliding machine for the C category. 

In turbulence and wind, or in the valley breeze, the Leopard with its 7 aspect and thinner profile had the edge of course with a high capacity in getting through and moving forward and up easily which is logical. 

I will hopefully try the Leopard with NIVIUK’s new 2-liner EN-D, the ’Peak 6’. A wing of the same class as the Leopard. 

Handling and pleasure:

The brake length of the Artik-R is slightly longer than the Artik 6, but it still with good agility. Not as sharp as the A6 in turns, but still good enough to be satisfied. Smoother in turns than the A6, as I was able to core every single thermal easily. The Artik-R doesn’t dive in turns as the A6. It turns more efficiently flat without losing the core. 

Throwing wingovers, and playing around on the Artik-R could also be playful, but it was engineered to be an efficient XC tool, getting the most out of the present lift. 

Flying the Artik-R in XC and transitions at bar is very efficient for the class. The B controls have a moderate pressure, slightly less than the LT2, with a swift response making it very easy to keep the glider overhead.  The leading edge kept its pressure in all my testing, and I was completely satisfied with the complete package.

Ears are stable, and the descent rate with half bar is around -2.5 m/s… -3 m/s, they reopen with pilot intervention. I also flew the Artik-R at 88 all up to be able to comment. It flies and handles a bit slower. It is safely doable if someone wishes., but to be efficiently competitive, I personally prefer to fly the size 23 at +93 all up.  I personally like my gliders to feel more dynamic and also I need more connection in strong air.  

Flying the Artik-R at 95 won’t lose anything in weak thermals, and would be better in getting faster into the heavy airmass.

360s needs two turns to get smoothly into it. Getting out while keeping your weight shift inside the turn is smooth like any other C. 

Conclusion: 

Today, manufacturers are trying to satisfy a large group of pilots from the high B's to the high C’s but some are resilient to deliver a suitable and comprehensive 2-liner for the C category. The Artik-R seems to have filled that gap comfortably.  

But there’s no miracle! In the 2-liner EN-D category, the Peak 6 for example was created to give you more performance with a higher pilot level. 

With the Artik-R, you are flying a 2-liner with near the comfort of 3-liner C’s. Perhaps around a +12 % increase in pilot level in strong air.  

There’s no special flying technique for the Artik-R!  So a confirmed C pilot, or even a ‘confirmed’ high B pilot with two full seasons in strong air, would find the Artik-R to be a nice evolution to fill his goals.  

The overall gliding performance ‘in moving air’ over the 3 liner C’s ‘example Artik 6’  is increased by 10-12 % (just a personal idea) 

Now the clearer advantage is the top speed when overlapping pulleys gives around +18 km/h over trim at 1000 ASL.   

I’m sure a demo would be an exciting and interesting experience! :-)  

 

Ozone Submarine M size

Ozone Submarine M size

Ozone released a harness for minimizing the drag produced by the pilot/harness combination, and the main purpose is the extra glide angle in competitions.

I received one Submarine in `M’  size for a test flight. 

The base harness is an exoceat that has been modified a bit. A thick wooden seat board is installed, and the chest strap width is fixed at around 50 cm. My personal feel and imagination, look like it is made to fit a pilot in a ‘Formula 1’ seating position! 

The soft envelope surrounds the harness and both hands are inserted like wearing a jacket with also a Zipper that comes from the end of the pod to the cockpit, and another one from the cockpit or the main deck to be secured at the pilot's neck exactly like zipping your warm jacket. The air enters by the front and when it inflates in this efficient aerodynamic shape, only the pilot's head and arms can be seen outside the Submarine. 

To reach that aerodynamic streamlined shape, you must adjust all the side and front adjustments to keep it horizontal while being convenient for your liking. Ozone made a very nice video following that link (   https://flyozone.com/paragliders/products/harnesses/submarine   )  explaining how it is done.  But for sure, to sit in that harness, you must be a hard-core resilient competition pilot with one focus on the finish line. 

The harness weighs around 8.3 kg for the M. There are two side rescue pockets, rather small pockets to fit a normal rescue with a bit of patience.

The triple -Bullet-pedal accelerator has a long cord, that should pass through the riser pulleys of your competition glider while you need to remove the original Dyneema line on the risers or at least wrap it around the riser. The video and pics show it well. 

I spent a whole day trying to find the best comfortable and horizontal position to my liking, and finally, I succeeded. The next day, was to try it in 30 km’h windy take-offs,  which to my surprise was really easy while holding the rear end under my arms before launch. My buddies were amused taking some pictures :-) attached…

Overall, when you get used to it, it’s easy to take off and land like any other harness out there. It’s just the time preparing it to fly that has to be a bit tricky. There are two cockpits to install the higher cockpit holds the flying instruments that can be seen through the plastic window, and the lower cockpit can also hold lots of instruments and a 5 kg water ballast.  

In the air, the Submarine feels and looks exactly like a Submarine !! :-)  As only the pilot's head is outside with his eyes near the long front surface, the air feels really smooth! That’s a description all the Submarine pilots would feel! The sound of the wind is calmer and the impression you get is a smooth aerodynamic efficiency…At least that’s a first feeling…

Later I flew with my friend both of us on Zeno 2 and the same size and same load. My friend with the Submarine M size and I’m on my X-rated 6.  

I really don’t want to get into lots of discussions and that’s just my small humble opinion.

On trim glides and about 5 km, I didn’t see any difference.  Above 53 km/h there’s a very slight improvement for the Submarine after 5 km.  

I think, for winning competitions you need to save every meter you gain after your long glides. So, 5 meters….10…15 meters…adding those meters after several glides could be your winning ticket to achieving your goals.  

Conclusion: 

I was amazed by the ingeniosity of that design. All the small details were studied to have that streamlined shape and efficiency.  It is a bit delicate to handle, and landing on a tree isn’t a good idea and will eventually destroy the outside envelope.  I don’t see how the rescue lines will pass near the collar without damaging the cloth…in case of a rescue opening. But it could happen without damage. 

The difference in efficiency to gain gliding performance between a normal seated harness and a pod harness with rear fairing is greater than comparing the same pod harness with fairing to a Submarine. 

But there’s a difference in speed and on long glides. 

Every pilot will find a whole complete set of harnesses from pod to simple ones to his liking. The Submarine is a complex harness for a purpose. 

If you are a very good competition pilot, and you need those extra meters that will help you get closer or be on a podium, then the Submarine is definitely for you if your competitors have a similar harness, then getting a high-end stream-lined harness like the Submarine, will keep you close in the game!

Triple Seven Q-Light MS (75-95)

Triple Seven Q-Light MS (75-95)

I have already tested the Queen 3 in that exact same size. Here’s the light version called Q-Light 3.

Triple Seven uses on the upper surface the superb Porcher Skytex 27 Double Coated and on the Leading edge Porcher Skytex 38. The bottom surface holds the Porcher Skytex 27 Double Coated and the profiles are made from Porcher Skytex 27. The hard finish Suspension and main lines used are PPSLS Liros and Edelrid A-8000-U. The new thinner risers are quite interesting.

Launching the Q-Light 3 at 92 all up is much better than the already good Queen 3. The Q-Light 3 launches faster and fills with air even with no wind! The air intakes are also very small like the Rook light, and the Queen 3, but the inflation of the Q-Light 3 is super easy! No hard point, no hanging back. Immediately take off. Problem solved on this Q-Light MS.

I flew in some moderate air and flew in some turbulent areas to confirm later that the overall movements are similar to the Queen 3. The Q-Light 3 doesn’t have the very tamed character of the Alpina 4. but it is more enjoyable to fly if the pilot prefers a little more roll feedback, a more direct shorter brake travel, and swift handling, with very slight pitch feedback. These features are excellent to have in a glider for educated pilots IMHO.
In strong or more turbulent air, it moves more than an Alpina 4 for example but stays on top of your head. It resembles the excellent Cayenne 5 movements.
The Q-Light seems slightly differently tuned than the Queen 3.

The trimming of the Q-Light 3 felt slightly different in a positive way. Probably it's the light fabric, but I think there’s a slight very small trimming change that allows the Q-Light to feel more fluid through the air.
After some glides with other 3 liners C’s, The Q-light 3 showed me no less than a top-end glide for that category. I think the Q-Light 3 glide angle is unquestionably good.
Flying next to my reference gliders in climb, I was impressed by the efficiency of the Q-light 3 as I was always able to match the best climber in that category.
The climb rate in the very weak and difficult lift on the Q-Light 3 felt also impressive as the Q-Light 3 floats incredibly well! After some hours in the weak lift, I can confirm that it really climbs like a “Queen”!

The brake travel is slightly higher than the Q-Light 2 I had and the overall agility is slightly reduced, but still, it's a pleasurable and agile glider to fly.

The C steering isn’t as fluid as some other C’s. I would have preferred a pulley on the B’s for smoother and linear C steering.
When pulling the C risers for control, the lines pass through a hard ring, rub and you can feel the pressure they induce. Another system with a pulley that delivers a smoother feel could be very welcomed!
The top speed is around 13 km over trim. The speed bar has a moderate pressure feel and is a bit harder at the end of the second step. Big ears are moderately stable and open without pilot intervention.

Conclusion:
I’m very curious to see what the new future 2-liner generation is willing to offer more and if they would be easier to manage or deliver more overall performance… One thing is certain. The 2 liners ‘feel’ and the way you control the B risers at speed are unique to them which is logical!
Now for the weekend warrior, who is looking for a 3-liner C at least for the next year to observe what would be the gain with the 2 liners, and also how well they would cope with summer turbulence, the Q-Light3 as a conventional 3-liner, has an impressively complete package of top end performance in glide and climb with very good agility and pleasurable handling.

Cheers,
Ziad