SUPAIR Step X size 80-100

Disclaimer:

Please note again… that tests will always differ with other sizes. At first, if flown with seatless harnesses, or must I say a completely different harness. Also if the same sizes are flown at different loads, lighter loads will get the weakest climb but will be penalized in control in heavy air or pushing through a heavy airmass. Bigger sizes have more gliding performance and also better climb in weak conditions.  In my small tests, I always state the size, the total flying weight, and afterward IMHO, the optimum weight I found in that particular glider.

SUPAIR Step X  size M flown from 93 to 97 all up. 

The Step X is the new 2023 high EN-B from Supair. I will let you visit their website for the construction details and materials. https://supair.com/en/produit/aile-parapente-supair-en-b-step-cross/

The Step X has an aspect ratio of 5.65 made with Dominico, has 3 rows of lines, and the overall weight of the M size is around 4.3 kg with very nice construction details! 

It is a relatively light EN-B and launches easily without any wind without any hard point. A straightforward glider to launch. In the stronger breeze, I didn’t find any nervousness or dynamic surges, but a smooth and easy-to-launch glider.

I flew the Step X at 97 all up in one turbulent very strong day, in our Cedars range (Explained down below) 

Comfort and accessibility.

I found that the Step-X managed well all the harsh conditions without any tip fluttering, and still delivered a very prompt brake authority for the pilot to stay in control. Alternating flights and test flying the Mentor 7, I think that the Step-X is also a highly comfortable glider for that category! I was really surprised by the educated feedback and balanced movements of the Step-X in overall conditions. The Step X has slightly more feel than the Mentor 7 while remaining very comfortable to fly.  To place it even further, I think it resembles the Swift 6 accessibility for the same size. 

Handling and agility:

The brake length on the Step X is slightly longer than the Mentor 7 and slightly less than the Swift 6, which place it in the sweet spot. You need just around 15 to 20 cm to steer the glider after the first 10 cm gap. 

The Step X is quite an agile glider and coring tight thermals are easily doable. The pressure is on the moderate side with its effective brake range to control the surges in active air, and flying it for hours is not tiring for the arms. 

While the Maestro 2 could deliver more dynamic handling, the Step X is close in agility while being more user-friendly for the new high B pilot in that class, and calmer in thermals while coring every bit of lift.

Climb rate:

I flew next to higher-rated 2-liner C class gliders in thermals, and the climb rate in weak thermals was very good on Step X around 95 all up. It floats well! For real, this glider climbs very well comparing it with the B class.

It is for sure slower to enter the airmass as the 2 liners but for a high B with 3 lines, it climbs extremely well! 

Gliding through the moving airmass and comparing it to other high B’s the Step X showed me also that it matches the best ones out there! Usually, when a glider has fewer lines like 2.5 ..etc..they should glide more, but flying the Step X near, I didn’t notice any disadvantages… What can I say…when a new creation seems really good and competitive!  I was impressed! 

I will update my B comparison for the little details in climb and glide, but I confirm that the Step X has a very efficient glide through the airmass for the high B category. 

The speed bar has a moderate pressure, and the C steering has acceptable efficiency while on the bar for the 3 liners glider. Perhaps the Maestro 2 and the Rush 6, have swifter C controls, but nevertheless, the Step C controls are manageable and easy to use to control the overall movements. 

The top speed is around 12 km/h over trim. 

Ears are stable and reopen without pilot intervention. 

Conclusion: 

The Step X can be flown easily at 93 all up but it would be slow to enter the airmass. I found out at 95 to be nice overall, and to be even more efficient and more compact with good penetration fly it at 97,98. 

When a product is nice, readers are expecting the testers to find the negative points, when they are difficult to find… My B comparison will shortly be updated. 

Easily placed among the high B’s in terms of good overall performance, the Step X is an enjoyable glider to fly while being well-balanced and quite comfortable during long XCs. The passive safety seems quite high for that category delivering a solid and light-to-carry companion for your adventures. Supair never stopped to amaze me… It would be quite an interesting high B to test fly! 

Cedars range: 

 Cedars range divides the country in half horizontally from north to South. The peaks are facing east and west. They reside above the very hot Bekaa Valley, situated inland of the country. If the thermal breeze is from the west, you will get nice conditions, but if it comes from the east, which it always does afternoon, then the challenge arises especially at noon, and preferable to fly only hang gliders as the very strong breeze literally limit your forward speed with sudden powerful thermals, and since taking off from the east side, a mix of strong valley east breeze and southwesterly wind coming from the sea side toward inland makes the word turbulence a bit undermined …   

When I fly gliders there, I often feel many times I’m just a puppet underneath even on the easiest glider!  Not a good feeling as sometimes, the workloads are extreme and need lots of endurance over the time spent and quite tiring.  At 11 am +6 m/s thermals are common, with a high cloud base over 4500 m, but since there’s a commercial flight line passing over from 4000 m and up, so controlling your height is also very crucial!  

Flying 2 hours from sunset to dark is the best experience a pilot would have. Smooth lift everywhere with a high cloud base. 

U-Turn Infinity 4 S (70-90)

U-Turn Infinity 4 The lightning little sister for the B entry level. Launching is super easy, with just a slight pull on the A’s. The Infinity 4 feels relatively very light. Once airborne, the Infinity 4 react with the environment with moderate roll movement and a nice neutral pitch behavior. Much less than the one on the Lightning. The trim speed is a bit slow . It could be around 37 km/h. The handling inside thermals is excellent. The brake pressure is light and the wing reacts quickly and precisely on input ! I could say easily that it has one of the finest handling among the low rated B’s. Climb rate inside the thermals showed a similar efficiency as the Blacklight which is excellent in this category. The Infinity 4 could be slowed down inside a small bubble and it can efficiently core it to base. Doing some glides puts the Infinity 4 in the middle to high of the category . With the low trim speed, doing some long glides with bar is efficient. The Infinity 4 doesn’t loose much at full bar ! It stays well on a good glide angle. Big ears are stable and reopen by themselves. Conclusion: The Infinity 4 S at 90 all up move a bit in turbulence but stays surely in the low B category and can be described as a sweet glider…Light on the brakes ,light on the bar, efficient on glide and especially on the climb . I wish it had a faster trim speed…

Weather

I'm a bit late in testing those new gliders..but the weather this year has been the worst ever encountered in 25 years !!
Lots and lots of strong wind...everyday from sea level (45 km/h) to 3000 m (100 km/h) ! 
Cloud base is lower than the take off by 100 m sometimes !
I never seen such a bad weather for paragliding in this part of the world :-(   ...
But a very good weather for kite-surfing and windsurfing ;-)  
Until the weather settles....One day hopefully soon  :-) 

Cheers,
Ziad

GRADIENT GOLDEN 3 80-100

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tX9eTiTLgE



After some flights in thermal conditions, loaded at 95 kg all up ,with an impress harness, here is what I found.

Construction and quality are very good ,to the last detail in simplicity and GRADIENT style .It inspire confidence just by looking. Regular risers and lines , excluding the thin lines on top.





Launching the glider is easy, in all conditions. Nothing special on that.

In the air, at my wing loading I found the brakes long as the Aspen 3,but the wing is agile in smooth conditions. When it is turbulent and bumpy, I need to insist keeping the brakes in a low position in order to turn the glider faster.

Hitting a thermal the glider pitch back a little, after it settles inside, it cores perfectly till cloud base.

The GOLDEN 3 is a little talkative glider for an EN-B glider without excess. It moves but stays overhead showing the thermal direction.

The brake pressure is a little heavier than the Aspen 3,but it remains in the light cat.

The accelerator is efficient and the wing remains very stiff fully accelerated. Induced collapses are soft in recovery.

Wing overs are nice and could be high, and coordinated.

The feeling in the air is like a typical GRADIENT glider.

Performance...


Today was perfect for testing the performance vs the ORYX. My friend Moni took the GOLDEN 3 with a total weight of 100 kg and flying a pod samurai harness.
Myself flying the ORYX with an impress 2 + harness and an all up weight 93 kg.

Gliding in a little shaky air but without any headwind ,shows that the glides are nearly the same with a slight advantage in speed to the ORYX loaded only at 93 !!.

In the weak thermals ,and even loaded at 100 kg ,the GOLDEN 3 is really great.I think it has the edge in climb in the weak stuff. We were practically together all the way up,and I could feel that the climbing of the GOLDEN 3 is catching up… Then Moni missed a small thermal by going further left to the ridge ,and I waited up a little (see video)

When he got up again we settle on a small glide headwind ,heading north. Here the ORYX shines…No comment how it is really good in headwind glides !!!

Knowing that , we did return to land on take off and Moni got the ORYX to try at 98.5 all up (Weight of ORYX is 4.5! ) and I took the Artic 2 Small (EN-C) loaded at 95 all up for a test glide also.

Launching and going up, surely the advantage of quick climb is for the Artic 2(EN-C) .This glider is a reference between (EN-C) gliders. Now the good part is the 2 km headwind glide with the ORYX .

We were both surprised as you will be, seeing the video! They were both equal in this glide...(NO more Comment,see the video)with an advantage for the ORYX in trim speed. But when I pressed the bar headwind with the Artic 2 ,the difference is of course in favor of the EN-C glider.

Finally our conclusion is:

Our thoughts were that we really were amazed to see such performance gain in the EN-B cat + the ease to fly them without the stress of a high performance glider. It was such a joy…We felt that the GOLDEN 3 has an outstanding climb rate and a very easy feeling in the air.


A glide in still air is not important because the gliders fly always in active air.Just for fun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P-Y7gqzHfU



Video in weak thermals.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Im8un92L7h4

Interview Michael Nesler

Hi,
In those difficult times, I'm trying to send glider designers some questions in order to give you a more comfortable way to spend the time at home. Here's is a very interesting interview with Michael Nesler.
I knew about Michael Nesler's designs since I began to learn paragliding. He is from the “golden era”
His exceptional profile!
https://profly.org/Nesler/?fbclid=IwAR2BWVXaBxlExeTXrozwoC
( Click personal)


Dear Michael,
At first, I hope that you and your family are doing ok! The conditions in Italy are critical, and hats off to the Italian doctors, nurses and everyone involved…God be with you all!
Thank you for taking the time to answer my questions.

Ziad: I have flown your designs recently. Let's take for example the Nyos RS EN-B.  It doesn’t have a shark nose, or the back positioning A’s, the lines are not that thin as some high B competitors, but it seems to glide as good as the best!  In your opinion for the moment, is positioning the A’s far back, for a high B is a must for selling? or there’s some benefit in that category in cutting through the airmass? Will this work for a B? Knowing that the latest Ozone R5 doesn’t seem to have the shark nose of the older models.

Michael: What ultimately determines the performance of a paraglider is very complex. Let me give you an example: If I have the Nyos RS made in China, it will fly like the one you've been flying. If I have it built in our factory in Croatia with the same files and materials, it will fly much better.
According to the experience of the last years, the dependency of performance is roughly distributed like this:
* 35% project
* 25% material
* 40% manufacturing quality (cutting, sewing, control)[/i]
Of course, the media and customers get off on technical, tangible details such as shark nose, A-loops, etc., but precision is much more important.
The fact that the Shark-Nose cost performance has meanwhile been accepted by other manufacturers. That's why they still install the rods crossed at the opening, but when you look at the profile shape without opening, there is little left of real Shark-nose.
In summary: If you could make any model you wanted with better materials, individual cuts, and very good sewers, it would be vastly superior to mass production. But no manufacturer can afford that.
The position of the A-Loops is not important for performance, only for safety and durability. And this is contrary to each other: Either more safety and shorter service life - or vice versa!


Ziad: I’m impressed! I never knew that it would differ that much! There are companies in Srilanka doing a clean job on paragliders. Do you still think that if it's done in Croatia or should I say in a more delicate and precise way it would fly better? How better please? What are those differences?

Michael: No, factories in Srilanka, China and other places are doing a clean job for economical serial production. But they are far away from the maximum possible.

Ziad: You said earlier that they can't afford that?  why? Can you comment, please?

Michael: Simple to calculate: Cutting 16 layers (8 gliders) on rotating knife cutter or high power laser needs nearly 8 hours = 1 hour/glider. If you make a single cut with high precision, you need also 8 hours = I glider!
A good sewer needs 30-40% more time to finish a perfect wing. So in the end, the glider will cost, also using the best material, quality control, individual trimming, ca. 60-80% more. Nobody will pay for this!

Ziad: You also said: On a competition glider, no one will use a shark nose if its cost performance! The Enzo 3 and B11 use it. What are your thoughts, please?

Michael: They are far away from real Sharknose: if you don't watch the crossed ends of the rod in the vent, but the real shape of the profile, you will see that there is nearly no shark-nose anymore! Only simulating a step on the vents you don't get a real shark-nose: te vent area is filled with a compressed air cushion!


Ziad: There are lots of nice ideas for designing paragliders. I always wondered if we put all them together in one glider, would that be beneficial? Some could be for marketing purposes, but some works quite well… I mean for all the classes, probably a shark nose, RAST, a 3D clean leading edge, and all the internal technologies, optimized unsheathed lines, etc, etc…  or there’s something that today's designers cannot overcome.

Michael: I am currently working on an EN-D two-liner, which we have both with and without a shark nose. In the lower speed range of the certification, the Sharknose doesn't make sense, it just causes disadvantages.
If I were given the job of building the perfect glider, I would:
- Take this material here: https://www.extremtextil.de/dyneema-composite-fabric-ct03e08-12g-qm.html (I've built a couple of base wings with this, brilliant!)
- Cut the glider individually by laser
- Glue all panels before sewing
- Accompany the sewing personally
- Use Vectran lines
The absurd thing is that such an existing model would fly better than a new, allegedly improved one of conventional design.

Ziad: Why Vectran lines?

Michael: Vectran has less elongation, is more stable during aging, am stronger. It would be perfect as main lines, also with cover. But till today nobody is producing Vectran baselines for Paragliders (with colors, coating/cover). But they are used for many years in high-performance skydiving canopies.

Ziad: What are your thoughts about a super designing tool? Will a futuristic superior software help in the design of our flying machines? Or are we still limited by the materials?

Michael: We have long been outside the reasonable tolerance with regard to production and material. It will hardly be possible to increase performance with conventional and inexpensive solutions.

Ziad: I was always fascinated by the internal structure of a glider. For example, the UP Escape had some cross reinforcements that were never been seen lately?  Is it right to believe that internal structure is the main key to performance and safety?  Are we still far in this field?

Michael: I know the Escape very well, I made it. But this construction has one main disadvantage: too much waste, too expensive!
The inner life serves only one purpose: Less lines! There is one clear limit: the strength required by the certification. Most high-performance gliders push this to the limit. So you couldn't have less lines. A highly complex inner life is interesting and light, but it is certainly not a parameter with which you can improve performance.
Unless you build gliders with over 100 cells, they would become too heavy without 4 or 5 cell spacing.
Ziad: What are the benefits of using very light construction of RAST on a 7 AR 2 liner glider? I think you surely thought of that!

Michael: I have been flying it for 3 months now and it feels like an EN-B paraglider to me. I fly it here in the Dolomites in conditions where others prefer to stay on the ground with the B-gliders, and I feel comfortable. What I miss is better take-off behavior in snow and tailwind and big ears.
But I have now found a solution for this, including certification without folding lines.

Ziad: What are your future projects? Any new harnesses? certification for the 2 liner?

Michael: I am working on a harness for pilots who like to fly very precisely with weight and want to be a perfect unit with their equipment.  This will be a niche product: Ultralight, high strength (with Kevlar fabric and Dyneema), with seat board and no cross bracing. So completely against the mainstream. This is not a Swing order, but a Profly project.
EN-D is in work and should be approved according to Corona.

Ziad: What do you think about seat and seat-less harnesses? Rear fairing or not?  Which do you think is more appropriate to your liking?

Michael: We have several harnesses here for testing our gliders. And have found that flight behavior, performance, and safety are more influenced by the different harnesses than by the trimming.
I am surprised that the manufacturers of harnesses do not even adhere to the requirements of the certification regarding the height of the main suspension. Most of the current harnesses have a much higher main suspension than the certification requires. In addition, the newer harnesses are being cross-braced more and more. This allows weaker pilots to fly with higher classified gliders, but it reduces performance significantly compared to flying a simpler glider with a good harness.
In all comparisons, I still find the old Woody Valley GTO-Xalps Race (2.2kg, with a board) the best for me.

Ziad: what if we were all flying the same model and there were no other models?

Michael: Then no one would be able to blame the material for bad flights, no one would be able to boast of being an unpaid brand ambassador, and no one would be the hero anymore for flying such a great, dangerous glider.
Ziad: Would this be less fun then?

Michael: Let's face it: the whole discussion about performance is only needed by the manufacturers, the salespeople, and the media. After all, what else would they be able to captivate us, pilots, with?
I still like to build high-performance machines on commission, but nobody really needs them.
Most pilots would be better advised to work on their technique, perception, and psyche instead of constantly stunning themselves with new material.

Ziad: You mean like one design glider for "Olympic games"? But that will also be branded somehow...
Michael: Here we have been shortsighted! If we got a one-design class for competition (ok, different brand, but very strict parameters like in sailing or formula one) we would be since many years in the Olympics! The same model means, that the results come from the pilots and not form the glider (and the money to buy always the best wing)


Ziad: A message for the pilots staying at home?

Michael: This is a good time to start thinking about flying:
* Why am I flying?
* What's in it for me?
* What would give me more performance?
* What are my goals and wishes when I fly?It is best to write (on real paper!) because this keeps all-important channels of perception involved (sight, hearing, touch).

Thank you very much for your time!

Best regards,
Ziad


PS: Every designer has his own perception and futuristic ideas. The above interview was made to show a different and interesting point of view.
IMHO, the best glider you seek is the one that makes you feel good, and that special 'you' is a very personal matter 
Stay safe!
Ziad

-

BGD Punk M

BGD Punk M

The Punk is BGD replacement for the Base in the high B category. 

Got to fly this one from a friend.

With an aspect ratio of 5.4 the Punk has a nice line configuration and width to match current high B gliders. The overall construction is well made with a shark nose.

Launching the Punk is easy for a high B. It inflates quite fast in nil wind with no hanging back. The launching is immediate.

I flew the Punk M (75-95) from 90 to 94. It’s quite flyable in 90 all up in moderate conditions. In small punchy thermals i found it best to be at the top weight in order to cut through, and turn immediately on command.

The brake authority are quite nice with moderate pressure. The handling and the way to steer the Punk M at 93 all up is really nice for the category. It gave me nicer and more fluid turns than a Rush 5, or a Mentor 5. 

I can describe the handling as more linear inside a turn, and the Punk is quite obedient to place it in turbulent small thermals swiftly if loaded. 

It can be similar to the Rush 4 (four) brake authority but with slightly more pressure. 

Comfort: 

Flying the Punk M in different sites with some close to the sea (turbulent this time of year) to the Cedars range at 3000m which gave some strong conditions, showed me that the Punk movements in the air are slightly more than a Rush 5 or a Mentor 5 but quite manageable, and easy to understand. For a high B glider i found that the Punk is an overall comfortable glider to fly.

Comfort will also be better when the brake authority is good on a glider, especially for the keen pilot who will be able to have a good control trough the brake length which the Punk is providing.

Entering strong air, the Punk M at 90 will slow a bit pitch slightly back a little before entering while the Rush 5, Chili 4, slips through.   

If loaded at top, the Punk M pitch behavior will be reduced and will be ‘slightly’ more efficient upon thermal entry. 

Climb rate:

Next to a Rush 5 similarly loaded, i found out that the climbing ability of the Punk M is really good. Entering the thermals the Rush 5 could slip through faster as it surfs slightly better the airmass, but when inside , the Punk has a very good and competitive climb with the best high B’s. The authority on the brakes as i mentioned before will let the pilot place the Punk exactly where he wants to if properly loaded. 

Glide:

I flew the Punk M with an X-rated 6, next to a Rush 5 MS with an Ozium harness loaded at top, and found out also that gliding tip to tip on seven long glides in tricky air and in calm air, showed at first the slightly faster trim for the Punk and same top speed (updated). For the high B category, i could place the Punk glide angle at the middle plus. I’ll update my B comparison soon.

The Mentor 5, Chili 4, Cumeo, Iota 2 being on the top of that category, with an edge for the Rush 5. 

The pressure on the speed bar is moderate and easy to use. 

The C control have moderate control as all the B gliders in that category.

Ears are stable ,efficient, and reopen quite fast. Induced lateral collapses are very easy to counter steer. The glider stays on path, even without counter braking. 

Wing overs are quite dynamic, build up quickly, high and fun.

Conclusion: The Punk is a pleasurable to fly glider in the high B category. Excellent climb rate, good gliding properties, very nice brake authority, and a good comfort for the category.


This is only my opinion. Make your own !

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. 

Mac Para EDEN 5 26

Mac Para EDEN 5 ! (The hidden Treasure ! )

The last gliders I flew from Mac Para were the Magus XC2 and the Marvel. Both were on the edge of performance in their category especially the climb rate!
Now Santa Claus brought to my hands this December new Eden 5 size 26(80-95), which I will fly at 91 all up weight and I am just taking some photos preparing myself for a long and amazing flight….

Launching this glider is as simple as it gets. The light materials in the leading edge do contribute to that easy forgiving launching.

In the air I felt immediately at ease and comfortable. The EDEN 5 inspires complete confidence in the air telling you to relax and enjoy your XC flight.

First turn into a thermal showed a light to medium brake travel with a very nice agility for the B category!
The Mac Para team has tuned the brake response and the agility of the glider in a high tech way! Meaning that ‘even’ a low end B pilot will get a forgiving brake travel, and the more experienced B pilot will sing and smile while turning with an efficient, agile, and beautiful turn radius. To combine those qualities in a single glider is something ‘very rare’ until now.

Turning in the air with another new B glider that has already a reputation for excellent climb rate, I found the EDEN 5 to be very close or even better sometimes! The leading edge doesn’t move much …It just enter the thermals and climb, and I could sense that by the beeping of the vario ! Just to tell you how the pitch movement is neutral. NO hanging back or pitching forward. And it is not a dull glider also. Just the necessary information’s.

I can confirm that the climb rate is on the ‘top’ of the category for the moment!

Trim speed at ‘91 all up’ on the 26 showed a 38.5 km/h. The accelerator at full bar will get you at 48.5 km/h at 1000 ASL. Next time I’ll fly it at 95…

This day was exceptional, with nice cloud base and long glides that enabled me to do some wing tip comparison with the best ‘B’ of the moment! That was tested recently on my blog.
Despite being just a bit slow on trim on the EDEN 5, I used the bar, which is light and easy to use, but short, to compensate the fully loaded other ‘B’ glider I am following, and to my surprise and after some several 8 km glides, I can see that the EDEN 5 was always very competitive! The glides were the same!

Pulling the accelerator at full bar in some turbulence showed a tough leading edge, without any nasty surprises.

The day has ended, and I was still flying that amazing and relaxing piece of art!

Big ears are stable and easy to use. A descent rate of -3m/s is showed with the accelerator. They open by themselves.

Conclusion:
With the EDEN 5, Mac Para has created their masterpiece in the B category.
Some B gliders that have a superb climb rate, and the EDEN 5 has the same .
Other B gliders that have excellent glide, and the EDEN 5 also has the same .
But to combine all those features in an easy, agile, and relaxing wing that could be also an entry to the B category is the real hidden force behind the EDEN 5.
The Mac logo ‘fly in peace’ should be printed on the EDEN 5 . Pilots who want to get an upgrade for their low end B’s will be nicely welcomed on board the high end EDEN 5!
Yes I talked too much …That’s because I found a hidden treasure!

Cheers,
Ziad.

Tests at Dustoftheuniverse.com

 

How the tests are made at dustoftheuniverse.com

Many pilots, and professionals have over the time asked me about the testing I make in my blog and how it is possible to get an assessment on gliders.

In this special area I am flying there is really some special conditions that allowed me to understand better the gliders I am testing.

Surely I will ‘not’ write a complete report in a normal and easy XC flight.

For me a glider is tested in: ‘Strong conditions’ and ‘Difficult conditions’, and that’s exactly what my flying spots frequently offer.

‘Strong conditions’ will enable me to understand better the cohesion of a glider in strong, punchy lifts and the ability of the glider to be controlled in these situations. After one flight in strong conditions will give a quick idea of the glider. But that’s not even 5 % of the tests! In strong conditions all gliders including speed gliders will climb to base eventually.

But the most important to me for evaluating a glider is the ‘Difficult conditions’ tests…

I mean in difficult conditions to test fly a glider:

1-Against a sea breeze on low altitude with very weak thermals .The better glider will always move forward and dig in that weak thermal rather than bumping into it and staying in a stationary flight.

 Sometimes when I say that a glider is reluctant to enter some thermals, I don’t mean in strong thermals…I mean when encountering a weak thermal and having that head wind or sea breeze, the glider in question doesn’t really dig forward enough to climb. Some will need more time to creep forward and climb, others will enter better that air mass if this sea breeze doesn’t exist. And to get a conclusion for that, my friend with whom I fly for 20 years and know well his skills, will be next to me with a glider known for its qualities, and I will be with the new testing glider.

For many flights side by side, we both could see clearly the differences in gliders who can be more fluid and efficient in those conditions.

2- In the lee side, with broken thermals and sudden lifts, especially slightly at ridge level, where the breeze from the other side is mixed with the lee thermals, here the ability to maneuver the glider is critical, as the lee side produces some turbulence and the thermals will be disoriented, and that will surely make the handling of a glider highly affected. In those conditions flying also side-by-side and exchanging some comments  “If possible sometimes” ;-)  about the feeling of the glider and its ability to turn inside that turbulent core.

3- The glide comparison:

In calm air many pilots are still looking for that glide number on paper.

That’s completely wrong. We all are flying the gliders in moving air, and that number is meaningless.

That’s why I do those glides in real flights next to my friend on another reference glider side by side with the videos that you are viewing.

But the conclusion for the B ,C.or D comparisons are the one to look at ,because those are made after many flights in

-Head wind glides

-Long turbulent glides

-With or without accelerator

The results are seen more clearly, and sometimes it could change a bit if I sensed some flaws…

Manufacturers need to produce gliders that sells…They seek and hope to get always positive feedback from mags or individuals which is normal! But sometimes it won’t be the case.

Not all the gliders in one cat could have the best performances or the best handling!!

A few can cope with the negative. It is a big business after all, but in order to be totally free I am buying the gliders for testing, and also writing whatever I feel under a glider.

On the other side, Manufacturers have their reputation to look at. I don’t think anyone will release a single piece of equipment with their brand name unless they are 100 % sure of its quality.

A small word for lesser lines:

The recently tested gliders having lesser main lines or attachment points lacks of cohesion in ‘very strong and turbulent air’. Some B gliders are still manageable but the pilot under them won’t have the complete authority of control in those conditions. Still better cohesion for the ones having 3A’s 3B’s ……

A small word for tested gliders in the B,C,D category.

The certification is just an idea. It won’t tell anything about the safety of the glider. Looking at the certification videos will give a 50 % idea of the situation. But remember, you are flying the glider in a moving environment that will put the glider in different angles to the horizon. The collapses encountered at that angle will be a bit different than on the certification videos.

The best is to read and listen to the manufactures recommendations and of course your trusty instructor.

Flying the gliders in normal conditions won’t get any results as all of us will eventually get low, or stuck in a valley breeze in the lee side…and in those tricky conditions the glider we fly matters a lot, because it will help us continue our flight or ended sooner.

My tests will be more precise to describe the difference between gliders because I believe that the best glider is the one that delivers each pilot the fun he requires.