Delta 5 MS & ML

Delta 5 MS & ML

I know many pilots are waiting for that glider, therefore I’m going to say a few words about it and wait for the performance tests to be done later with another 2 liner C, Photons, etc…in order to tell you exactly how it performs.

Meanwhile, let me state the obvious.

Take off of the MS at 92 and on the ML at 101.

Launching is easy, without a hard point. Overall easy to launch. 

In the air, the brake travel is short, direct, precise, and gives the pilot high authority on the brakes to hold, steer the glider in turbulence. Nothing to do with the Photon. With slightly moderate to firm pressure, the pilot is the master under the Delta 5. 

To compare it with the Zeolite 2 GT, the Rush 6 in brake control is different. The D5 is short and direct, the Zeolite 2 GT is slightly longer and smoother. The Rush 6 is lighter, slightly longer.

After flying this glider in some rough air, strong conditions, I can flawlessly say:

 

The structure is very rigid, very taught, very homogenous, like nothing, and I mean (Nothing) I have already seen in all the tested gliders. No moving parts in that glider :-) Just a solid, firm, compact structure! 

In high turbulence, it requires active pilot control, specifically for a two-season high B pilot. Not more. Easy to handle and comfortable to fly, but it is definitely a C-class glider that should be treated as such. 

In certifying the Delta 5, a collapse line was used to simulate the collapse. In all my flying in some high-risk areas, I only encountered a minor tire deflation without any consequences. I cannot comment on its behavior after real air and time collapse, but I can confirm that this one is very tough to close!  

The trim speed is fast to enter through the airmass, and very efficient! There’s no hanging back if properly loaded from +,- 92 on the MS and +,- 101 on the ML.

It behaves like the Photon in cutting forward, which is impressive. As I mentioned, the performance has to be done later. (With video) But looks very promising.

The speed bar has moderate pressure. The leading edge stiffens even more when pushing the speed bar! The B handles at trim speed have moderate pressure and can easily control the glider. When applying the speed bar, the B handle becomes a bit lighter, but it can also efficiently control the D5 overhead. 

Ears can be done by the outer A’s but need a bit of height and strong arms. Ears with outer B’s are easy to do. 

The stall speed is very low…and forgiving, but for sure keep conscientious when applying the lower speeds. 

1st resume conclusion:
Ozone designs and creates gliders, sometimes…to say the least, out of this world. :-) Like the Delta 2, which was something unique in its feel and. brake reactivity in the air, (MS0) at the time.
This Delta 5 was secretly created by perhaps the Elf Lords in some remote mountains hideouts sewn with mithril threads! ;-) Forgive me for the inspiration :-)
But…I am sure that this ring of power will embrace both high B and high C pilots altogether for some serious magical flights!
More to come :-)

Delta 5 (Performance)

The majority of pilots demand performance, but what is performance? Is it the glide angle in calm air? Is it the glide at full speed? 

For keen pilots, performance is the most efficient way for a paraglider to move forward and glide effortlessly into the air mass without losing altitude. Dolphin-nig is the right way to describe the latest profile created by Ozone, implemented on the Zeno2, Photon, and now also used on the Delta 5.

Doing some glides in still air next to the Photon, the Delta has a lesser glide angle, and it sits exactly between the Delta 4 and the Photon in terms of glide angle. 

But… the ability of that Delta 5 to get through difficult airmass is not seen yet on any six aspect ratio or easy two liner C! Saying that, when stuck in a place that you need to get out, the Delta 5 has the same (efficiency) as the Photon to surf upward the airmass. That ability is only found under that profile, which allows you to move forward and upward without bumping or pitching into the air mass. That's a big plus for me with the six aspect ratio, and it's easy to use a 2-liner C!

As for the climb rate, I found out that the Delta 2 has the same climbing abilities as the Photon, and will never miss a thermal to its sister if they are close.

The full speed of (around) 14 km/h over trim holds an excellent glide angle, and it's easy to keep your feet in moderate turbulence.

Conclusion:

My forecast for the Delta 5 is that it will be extremely popular because it encompasses all the key ingredients, from ease of flying and direct handling to efficient and mostly usable performance, which will appeal to the majority of pilots worldwide. Waiting for the Alpina 5 :-) Which should come later! 

Cheers,

Ziad

GIN GTO 3 (Video)

Hi,
This is my first video with the GTO 3. I hope you will like it.
More videos on that beautiful glider, hopefully later.

NEARBIRDS Zippy 3

Nearbirds Zippy 3 Light XC harness. 

Nearbirds has its unique touch when creating paragliding harnesses. The Zippy 3 is some kind of a lighter, the light version of already light Airy Vibe, with an ABS adjustment option. 

That harness resembles the Airy Vibe, but lighter. The straps are sturdy for high durability and strength. If you want a light harness but durable for hike and fly, XC, a travel companion, the Zippy 3 offers that solid package. The comfort inside that Zippy 3 highly resembles the Airy Vibe. Lots of straps for adjusting to the perfect comfort. I feel more (safer under a large strap harness! Maybe it's just me…But it seems to send reassuring informations to my head that I can often play around throwing 360’s, wing overs, with that psychological feel…you know what I mean if you have flown minimalistic super light harnesses, that are also considered very safe and strong…but its perhaps my head playing me around, saying to me: That’s a light harness but OK! 

The comfort on this L size, or the back and hips, is nice for my body configuration and height of 1.81 and 74 kg. The legs are naturally supported. I can reach the zipper on the front side of the cockpit to reach my instruments or stuff inside. A water release tube can be inserted. A camel water on the bag, two pockets on each side for your drag chute. A large pocket for the rescue system, I have already installed a medium (105 kg GIN rescue) that is relatively horizontally large, but fits nicely. 

The roll movements are moderate, even if the ABS is released. When you tighten the ABS, the roll is slightly more stable, like on the NK Arrow harness.  Much more stable than a WV GTO light 2, as you have the authority of control under the Zippy 3. Both are quite different in their underlying feel. The GTO 3 light and the Lightness 2 are very close in stability. The Zippy 3 joins the NK Arrow for roll feel.  

Two large open side pockets near the chest strap for any stuff, gloves, chocolate, etc… The only thing I wish to receive with the harness is a small line with a small ball, to clip on my shoe lace in order to get swiftly inside the pod, since the pod closes laterally. I just installed one in 30 seconds! No worries about that. You can also do it easily, and I think it's better.  

The Zippy 3 doesn’t have a seat bird, but Nearbirds installed a kind of frame on the edge of the seat that gives the seat board a feel, and I thought there was a seat board when flying it. Overall, it's efficient to control it with your thighs in turbulence. 

Here's a small video:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltxeLg1voaM&t=5s

Happy and safe flights,

Ziad

NOVA Vortex XS, Light 2 liner EN-C

NOVA Vortex XS, Light 2 liner EN-C 

After a few modifications on their EN-C Codex with its normal cloth glider, NOVA released a light 2 liner with the same aspect ratio of 6.1 

I flew the XS size that goes from 70-95 with a recommended weight of 80-90.  Here’s the link: https://www.nova.eu/en/gliders/vortex/#c16770

After some hours flying the Vortex with different harnesses ( Arrow-P, Nearbirds Zippy 3, Normal Arrow), I think the Vortex is easy to fly in all harnesses with a mild character.

Of course, you know me well, that I like to fly my gliders well loaded, I felt that at 90..92, I could get the best out of the Vortex in all conditions. It could be flown easily at its recommended weight range, but if you want a taught glider with immediate response and forward drive through a heavy airmass, then flying the Vortex at 90..91 is great. 

Launching that beautiful butterfly is super easy and flawless for a 2 liner. No shooting forward, just smooth inflation. When you kite the glider, you already feel and understand what to expect in the air from the movements and ability to be balanced overhead. 

Launching at 91 all up is straightforward. First lift the Vortex has a neutral pitch and goes through thermals smoothly without a pitch back or forward. The brake pressure when inducing a turn is on the moderate side, with a moderate length. You need around 25 cm to pull for a turn, but…with a linear response, meaning that you pull 2cm, the glider reacts, but it is still long and forgiving. It is possible to core narrow cores while enjoying every moment! The feedback comes from the risers, not the brakes.

One day, I flew that glider in strong air and punchy lifts. I was happy that I flew it around 91..92 all up. The Vortex loaded in those conditions, felt completely like a docile 2 liner C! A first 2 liner from the B class is possible and welcomed.  In turbulent air, the roll movements are tamed for a 2 liner C and as easy as on a 3 liner C (Artik7 P, for example). The A7 P that I still have over here, and fly in comparison, has shorter brakes and slightly sharper movements. The Vortex, being a 2 liner, doesn’t play in the same field of accessibility, perhaps a slight more control, but negligible…I’m only talking about pilot requirements for flying accessibility, not behavior after collapses, which I also didn’t experience when flying both gliders. 

Comparing the handling with an Ozone Lyght size S (65-85) flown at 85, the Lyght has a slightly shorter brake response for the same agility. Of course, the pilot level required to fly the Lyght is slightly above the Vortex, which seems like a lamb in comparison. 

Both the Codex and the Vortex offer the same comfort. 

Climbing next to the best 2 -liner Cs for reference, showed me that in weak climb and strong, the Vortex has good acceptable capabilities. ( I will update my C comparison for that) 

Doing some long glides with my reference glider, I saw a big potential in gliding power, mostly in calm air. The other 6.5, 2 liner machines had a slight advantage in a moving airmass. But for me, the Vortex was more than needed if I’m not racing toward a goal at full bar, or competing with a Lyght or Photon for the serial class. The Vortex got me everywhere I needed to be with a more comfortable ride and, most importantly, a light package! 

The B handles are slightly on the firm side, but ok for the XS size I'm flying. 

Ears are best done with outer A’s , because they are stable with an efficient sink rate! Playing around is fun, and the energy stored is high. 

Conclusion: 

The Vortex, with its light construction, compact packing, easy handling, and great maneuverability, offers an excellent package of accessible performance. for any (2-liner C class ) pilot going the light direction, especially for hike and fly, and of course, travellers!  For the majority of pilots, the 70 L outside bag containing a glider/harness/helmet will weigh from 7 to 8 kg, depending on your harness and rescue! That’s quite fun to have. 

Wishing everyone happy, safe flights and a beautiful summer! 

 

BGD Base 3 M

BGD Base 3 M

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

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

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

Launching:

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

In the air:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Climb rate:

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

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

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

Comfort and usability:

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

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

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

Conclusion: 

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

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