OZONE Swift 6 size MS flown at 93 and size S flown at 85 all up.

I already reviewed the amazing Rush 6 in MS and S size. Here’s the review of the Swift 6 in both S and MS sizes.
The takeoff of the Swift 6 in both sizes is easier to inflate than the Rush 6 as all lighter materials behave in that area.
The take-off was immediate on the MS at 93 all up, while the S size heavily loaded needed just two more steps.
Overall launching and easiness of steering on the ground go to the Swift 6.

I have flown the size MS at 93 all up on my X-rated 6 I think I should replace it soon…Waiting for both new releases, the NK Arrow and Ozone Forza 2…Let's see…
So back to the Swift 6, I can immediately confirm a much mellower feel under it than the Rush 6 which was a bit spicier when completely new. The brand new Swift 6 MS size is for sure more comfortable than the R6 with the same load. I felt that the overall movements are smoother in roll and the pitch is nearly absent. After 2 hours of flying it in moderate air, I felt a high degree of comfort as that glider was really relaxing to fly.
One day, my friend who was flying a Boomerang 12 size M less than 5 kg from the top, ( yes, a Boom 12…CCC ! and I’m not comparing it to the B class  …But it was just next to me…what to do?  )

The Boom 12 was next to me in the early thermals of that day, and we were tip-to-tip trying to find the better weak lift to climb.
Staying very close together, I was really surprised about the Swift 6 ability to float in weak air! I was able to keep a little height in the 15 mn we were stuck in a tiny thermal. So the Swift 6 seems very floaty.
Once we reached the cloud base, my friend took off on a glide going north, with a very slight headwind of 5 km/h, and he also pushed the first bar!
Oops….stuck on the Swift 6 with my stubborn head, I thought lets follow  … That’s me when I’m very optimistic 
But in order to keep the same distance I needed to push the speed bar to make the pulleys overlap, and with this configuration behind him by 20 m, I was at the same speed as my friend Boom… After a small 3 km glide, I arrived 10 m less !!!! at the same point in the mountains.
Later when the weather and windy conditions needed an efficient glider to get through the airmass faster, he disappeared in front! Not a match at all when going upwind and surfing the air. It was time to wake up!
Afterward flying with some high-end B’s, the Swift 6 showed me a similar glide to the Rush 6 and a really competitive one if comparing it to the C-class gliders.
The S size was flown with the new Delight 4 sport harness from Supair, which will be reviewed shortly this week. The Swift 6 S at 85 all up felt a bit different from the MS size as all the smaller sizes do.
It was a bit more alive for sure, but the climb and glide were equally efficient to the Rush 6 of the same size. The turning ability of the Swift 6 size S at 85 can be described as quite direct, agile, and could core thermals with a narrow core. The Swift 6 size MS was a bit more subtle and smoother in turns! I liked the MS size better at 93 for the smoothness and tight coring ability. The brake travel was slightly longer on the MS but really nice and quite agile also, and I was able to core every narrow thermal like a dream. The difference between the turning behavior of the R6/S6 is that the S6 felt a bit smoother and needed less input in the same air. The Maestro 2 size (75-95) felt more intuitive and more direct with a sharper feel through the brakes if flown at the same load or even at 90 all up. It is a matter of taste…

The difference between the Swift 5 and the Swift 6 S and MS if flown at the same load is that the pilot will feel more connected through the brakes under the S6 with a much sharper and shorter brake distance. The agility is similar but the brake authority is more present under the S6. I also felt that while you needed to fly the Swift 5 at max load or slightly 2 kg overloaded to get the best efficiency, the Swift 6 can be flown 2 kg less than the top for maximum efficiency, and that goes also for the S6 S which I felt that it could be better at 83 all up.

Ears are stable with outer A’s, and they reopen without pilot intervention. Landing is a non-event and the Swift 6 could be slowed down in a tiny spot landing. Some of our X-large landing spots go from 5 meters X 10 Meters!  It could be tricky to land a Zeno 2 for example in moving air, but the Swift 6 can be slowed down accurately.

Conclusion:
A light, agile smooth high B glider that has all the necessary tools to make your hike and fly, or XC experience at the max! The performance package is on top of the B category, and the ease of use is outstanding for the delivered performance. Now it's up to you to see if it fits your personal requirements! Happy flights,
Ziad

BGD Epic 2 65-85

Reminder:

The B category is a very wide and the most purchased category. In this one category, you can find gliders with a real aspect ratio from 4.8 to 6.3  ! which gives a huge gap in usability and performance.

BGD Epic 2  65-85

The Epic 2 is BGD's new low B glider for 2022-23 with a real aspect ratio of 5.2  and 3.8 projected.

I flew the Epic 1 and will share in this review the differences between those two, and will insert some low B wings to compare.

Launching the Epic 2 size S (65-85) at 84 all up in no wind needs a slight pull, no hard point, no surge forward, just an easy glider to inflate. In windier take-offs, the inflation is calm as if the Epic 2 is waiting for you to be ready. 

In the air, the Epic 2 has a relatively long brake travel, with a moderate linear feel for a low B. The brake travel is aimed to be forgiving.  It also turns well in thermals with an agility a bit similar to the Epic 1. 

The roll movements are very smooth and stable, and the pitch behavior felt also quite tamed. It enters thermals quickly, and the climb is straightforward. In turbulent air, I felt that the tips are softer than the center. They lose some pressure without any consequences, and a long pull on the brake refills them.

One day, I had on my side a friend which is a very good pilot on his brand new Rush 6 size S with the same load. 

The Rush 6 is a high B that I honestly consider, among the top high Bs in terms of overall efficiency.  But, I thought …why not share this flight and see how the low aspect ratio Epic 2 will hold on…

Flying together in weak thermals, I was amazed by the capability of the Epic 2 to float quite well! I think I had a tiny advantage in very weak stuff…But that doesn’t really matter, only that I can now confirm that the Epic 2 is a great climber in weak thermals. 

In some strong cores, and when I completely ease up on the brakes to let it fly through the rising airmass, I think we both have the same climb also. But for sure the ability for the high B,  R6 to dig through the airmass faster is logical and it shows when thermals are above 3 m’s. 

The slow turning behavior of the Epic 2 in strong cores requires a bit more time to place it inside the core than an Ion 6 for example, but its quite ok, and I consider it fairly agile.   

The overall efficiency in thermals and getting through inside them is clearly much better than the old Epic 1 !!! 

The trim speed of the Epic 2 similarly loaded as the brand new R6 with the same size and load showed me a faster trim speed for the Epic 2 by 1 km/h! 

The Epic 2 is fast at trim speed for a low B glider!

At the full bar, I got 9 km over trim, with locked pulleys. 

The glide at trim on the Epic 2 seems also very good! Of course not like the Base 2 and the Rush 6, but still an interesting glide, and after some comparisons, I can surely put the Epic 2  near the best ones in that (low B category). It glides really well!

ears are stable, and efficient with -4m/s  when using the speed bar. Induce asymmetries are very soft and very easy to recover.

Conclusion: BGD released a very easy low B that can be a logical move after school but with a high-performance package for that category. Going far on an XC day while flying the Epic 2 will be an easy task for weekend warriors! Try it to see if it fits your piloting taste and requirements :-) 

Cheers,

Ziad

GIN Avid 75-95

GIN Avid,  75-95 

I already flew the Explorer 2  https://ziadbassil.blogspot.com/2021/07/gin-explorer-2-size-s-75-95.html

Now GIN released the AVID which is a more robust version of the Explorer 2 and the use of new cloth. GIn quote: The Myungjin MJ40MF and MJ32MF fabrics are intended to withstand harsher, more abrasive environments.

Flying the Avid in different conditions and most variable ones ! from 90 to 95 all up with my grated 6 harnesses as usual… That way I can describe the feeling of that glider versus any other glider I flew for the past 6 years easily having still the same harness! 

I think flying it at 95 all up, is the way to go on the Avid.

Launching the Avid is super easy without any delay. very straightforward and easy to take off in all conditions. 

Once airborne I could feel the very high degree of comfort underneath the Avid that I also flew in some nasty places and in dry mountains. Despite the aspect ratio, Avid is tamer than many B’s with a lower aspect ratio. It delivers smooth feedback without being too demanding to fly. Probably a little more than the Chili5….and possibly less or similar to the Maestro 2 or Rush 6. Overall an easy B to fly.

It feels exactly like the Explorer in terms of pilot demand. 

The turning ability is quite good. With 15 -20 cm and moderate pressure on the brakes, I could turn the Avid inside any core! Very efficient and again (Smooth) turning behavior. 

What surprised me is the climb in weak to marginal conditions. This Avid really climbs well! It shares the same climbing properties as the Explorer 2 which is excellent! 

It is indeed a floater like no other Gin the B segment. It is difficult to land first while flying the Avid unless you make a mistake! 

In good conditions, you quickly find yourself at a cloud base! The Avid climb well! confirmed! 

Gliding will take a bit more explaining:

Doing some glides in calm air, without any wind, or sea breeze the Avid has a nice glide angle similar to the Explorer 2. which is also very very good! 

What surprised me is when doing some glides in windy, difficult conditions, while I’m at 95 all up, I didn’t feel I was efficient that much in going forward as I should be… I felt a bit pinned. Pushing the on the bar didn’t really improve my digging forward through that tricky airmass also. I just felt like sliding a bit.   I did many glides in different areas when low in some valley breeze and the result was as felt before. I think flying it a bit overloaded could be better… But I don’t know…

While pushing the speed bar, the C controls are really nice, they can stop and control the surges while being efficient and having a moderate feel. Quite nice! 

Ears are stable, they reopen sometimes without pilot intervention.

Full speed gave me 11 km/h over trim.

Conclusion:

The Avid is a calm, smooth B, not really demanding to fly, and could be good for upgrading after two seasons on a low B glider. I was hoping for an efficient cutting through the airmass high B glider.

However, this high aspect ratio B is very different from the Carrera series. It is much more forgiving. I flew that glider in strong air and it gave me a comfortable feel. The handling is very nice, as it turns as the pilot wishes with very good brake authority. And of course, the climb in weak air will crown you “Skygod’ of the day ;-) 

In the end, a test flight is worth a thousand words. and words. 

Triple Seven Queen 3 SM (75-95)

Triple Seven Queen 3 SM (75-95) 

One of my preferred gliders in the C category was a Q-Light 2 S size. Handling, turning behavior, feel under it, climb rate in weak, glide, were all 90 % over 100! 

Now Triple Seven introduced the Queen 3 in slightly different sizes than the older model. The SM size I’m test flying goes from 75 to 95 all up certified as a 3 liner EN-C.

Launching the Queen 3 is less than 5 km/h wind needs a few steps more in order to fill it with air, than regular C’s like Alpina 4, Elan3, Allegro…due to the small intakes on the glider.  

In 25 km wind, it is easier than the mentioned gliders and slower to inflate without the surge.  So what you lose when you take off in weak, you gain in windy take-offs.

I flew the Q3 with my X-rated 6 harness from 90 to 95 all up. The glider can be easily flown at 90, but to be faster when entering the airmass and to give it slightly more dynamism, flying it at 95 would be better.

The brake travel is relatively short, with probably around 10-12 cm after the 10 cm slack, you can steer the glider in moderate thermals. The Q3 needs just a slight pull to react. However the brakes are slightly harder than the Q light I had if you are flying in strong air, and you need to pull a bit more brakes around 25 cm and more.  Considering that an Alpina 4 has a relatively light to moderate pressure, the Elan 3 with its moderate pressure feel, has slightly less brake pressure. But as I said the more you pull, the more pressure there is.

Flying the Q3 in moderate air, I felt that with the 15 cm gap, the brake pressure is quite normal. Some pilots prefer that solid feel that could give them a secure impression.

The first 12 cm brake range reminded me of the Artik 6 ones, while the Artik 6 has slightly less brake pressure and a bit more dynamic agility. 

However, I consider the Q3 to be an agile glider similar to the Delta 4 and Alpina 4 but just very slightly slower to complete a 360 radius. The Q light 2 was quite remarkably agile and had more dynamic turning behavior than the new Q3.

I think Triple Seven wanted to create a much more accessible 3-liner C glider that can give its pilots a much higher (passive safety feel). 

The feedback comes from the risers. In small punchy cores, the Q3 rolls a bit more than the Delta 4, but the pitch stays very neutral and comforting. 

I flew the Q3 in various conditions, to notice that in weak thermals, the glider floats quite nicely and stays inside that weak thermal without losing it. The Q 3 is a good glider when conditions are weak and marginal. I can say it is a floater, with nice climbing properties.

Gliding in different air masses, I found that the Q3 gets inside any difficult headwind or airmass quite efficiently, but it takes time to enter. Not fast digging through, but slow and efficient. 

Some 3 lines C’s would struggle a bit and lose their glide, some surges forward quickly, while the Q3 stays on hold, slows a bit, but maintain the height and slowly dig through  ( Itsy bitsy ;-) …)   That’s why I felt that at 95 things could go slightly faster without losing the climb.

Flying while pushing the speed bar, give the Q3 a very nice glide angle, and the C steering is quite efficient. In turbulent air and while pushing at top speed, I had a few tips collapse, that opened without any reaction on my part. 

Ears are stable, they reopen with a slight brake pull. Induced asymmetries resemble a B glider, smooth and slow. Pushing the bar on the Q3 gave me around +13 km at 800 ASL.

Now to explore every point on the Q3, I saw that Triple Seven made a knot on the C’s called Cowboy loop …It reduces 1 cm of the C lines. For my own curiosity, I released it first by a simple knot and second without a knot.

In a single loop, things got much better, with a nicer feel through the air in thermals, in the airmass…etc but a 10 % increase in movements.

With no loops, the (new glider) felt more alive! It turned much better and is faster through the air, but requires some 35 % more pilot control, and when accelerated some small collapses occurred. So I think, it's better to keep the knot after some 50 hours, and to explore the possibilities…

Conclusion: Triple Seven stayed with a conventional 3 liner with a 6.2 aspect ratio, for now…to prove that it flies really well, has a higher passive safety, and is easier to understand than the Queen 2. The spices of feel and handling are slightly more tamed than the Queen 2 ones, but the overall performance is surely improved.  The Queen 3 is a mid-C glider in terms of feel in overall conditions.

So I think after being one full season on a Rook3, the Queen 3 is a logical evolution to stay on the safe side of the C certification.