My Delta 2 is getting up in the hours now, so starting research on my next glider. With the hours I fly each year, D gliders still don't particularly appeal, so I'm sticking to the C class
In the turbulent and windy air we have in southern California, my personal requirements are for a glider that smooths out as many bumps as possible, and makes me feel more comfortable pushing bar to get through strong sink. In the last two years I've had a real issue with just getting tired of managing my Delta 2 for more than two hours. I've had multiple flights that ended at the two hour mark because I was just exhausted by constantly being on the brakes to keep the Delta 2 flying comfortably. I rarely had these issues with my Delta 1, which was a more mellow ride in general.
A few weekends ago I took my friends brand new Rush5 for a short flight, and I was amazed at how different the experience on bar was from my aging Delta 2. The feel of the wing was almost the same on half bar as at trim, yet the speed was immediately apparent. With the Delta 2, as soon as you go to quarter or even half bar, although it is solid, there is distinctly different pitch behavior and a bit more nervousness, which meant I was always quite to come off bar when the air got rough. The Rush 5 simply went faster, giving me the feeling that it would handle any turbulence simply by flying faster through it, rather than reacting quite differently because of the speed.
A lot of pilots seem to gravitate towards sporty gliders with sharper handling. For me, that is not such a priority, as I am rarely throwing my glider around the sky. I love paragliding for the feeling of cruising over beautiful landscapes where we fly and the excitement of going XC and not knowing where I will eventually land, rather than the adrenaline of g-forces and seeing the wing below or behind me! I basically want comfort rather than sharpness, but without compromising thermaling ability or glide performance a a transition. The Delta 2 for me always had a little too much yaw and pitch while thermalling, and also required too many small adjustments to maintain consistent pitch on glide. It was a solid wing, no doubt about that, but didn't give me either the feeling of cutting through turbulence or converting it to lift. And in big sink, the Delta never encouraged me to push bar to get through it, it just felt like it might dive way to much and get too nervous if the sink suddently stopped or I hit a big gust while on bar.
My only two complete collapse on the Delta 2 were full frontals caused by wind gusts. Neither gave me any warning or reaction time what so ever. But they made me nervous about pushing too much bar.
I also found the Delta 2 much harder to lock into a consistent bank angle and let it climb than the Delta 1, which had a softer feel and was more forgiving in thermals. In terms of handling, I actually preferred the original Delta, despite the increased glide and rigidity of the Delta 2. The only problem with the Delta 1 was that it did collapse more often due to it being less pressurized, and sometimes it felt a bit too soft.
The other thing I am looking for is the ability to climb fast and consistently, and the ability to convert bumps into lift while on glide. Both of these things would reduce my flying workload while still being able to fly XC distances with the mental stress that has been causing me to land early.
Basically my XC paragliding skill levels or results didn't increase much since flying my Delta 2, with the extra workload to get the glider feeling efficient being the main factor. I've been flying long enough that I'm not hungry for airtime or distance at any cost. If I'm not enjoying myself on an XC flight, I just go and land in a spot convenient for retrieve. Maybe I'm getting lazy, I haven't had a long retrieve walk in years! But that also means I've cut a few flights short where I was more than capable of handling the conditions or the location I found myself in, but just wasn't enjoying the flying the glider that much.
So far the shortlist is down to four:
It's beautiful looking with the lime green "Cherimoya" and bright orange "Hardos" color schemes both being stunning. I also really like the fact that the underside and topside are both the same color, something that seems to be out of fashion on modern wings.
66 cells and aspect ration 6.3. It does not look like a glider with a 6.3 aspect ratio. The Queen 2 for instance appears much longer.
66 cells and aspect ration 6.16
The design is typical non-descript Swissness, the color schemes meh, so not really a serious contender. The thing I like most is the backpack....
Size ML - 85 - 105kg.
In the turbulent and windy air we have in southern California, my personal requirements are for a glider that smooths out as many bumps as possible, and makes me feel more comfortable pushing bar to get through strong sink. In the last two years I've had a real issue with just getting tired of managing my Delta 2 for more than two hours. I've had multiple flights that ended at the two hour mark because I was just exhausted by constantly being on the brakes to keep the Delta 2 flying comfortably. I rarely had these issues with my Delta 1, which was a more mellow ride in general.
A few weekends ago I took my friends brand new Rush5 for a short flight, and I was amazed at how different the experience on bar was from my aging Delta 2. The feel of the wing was almost the same on half bar as at trim, yet the speed was immediately apparent. With the Delta 2, as soon as you go to quarter or even half bar, although it is solid, there is distinctly different pitch behavior and a bit more nervousness, which meant I was always quite to come off bar when the air got rough. The Rush 5 simply went faster, giving me the feeling that it would handle any turbulence simply by flying faster through it, rather than reacting quite differently because of the speed.
A lot of pilots seem to gravitate towards sporty gliders with sharper handling. For me, that is not such a priority, as I am rarely throwing my glider around the sky. I love paragliding for the feeling of cruising over beautiful landscapes where we fly and the excitement of going XC and not knowing where I will eventually land, rather than the adrenaline of g-forces and seeing the wing below or behind me! I basically want comfort rather than sharpness, but without compromising thermaling ability or glide performance a a transition. The Delta 2 for me always had a little too much yaw and pitch while thermalling, and also required too many small adjustments to maintain consistent pitch on glide. It was a solid wing, no doubt about that, but didn't give me either the feeling of cutting through turbulence or converting it to lift. And in big sink, the Delta never encouraged me to push bar to get through it, it just felt like it might dive way to much and get too nervous if the sink suddently stopped or I hit a big gust while on bar.
My only two complete collapse on the Delta 2 were full frontals caused by wind gusts. Neither gave me any warning or reaction time what so ever. But they made me nervous about pushing too much bar.
I also found the Delta 2 much harder to lock into a consistent bank angle and let it climb than the Delta 1, which had a softer feel and was more forgiving in thermals. In terms of handling, I actually preferred the original Delta, despite the increased glide and rigidity of the Delta 2. The only problem with the Delta 1 was that it did collapse more often due to it being less pressurized, and sometimes it felt a bit too soft.
The other thing I am looking for is the ability to climb fast and consistently, and the ability to convert bumps into lift while on glide. Both of these things would reduce my flying workload while still being able to fly XC distances with the mental stress that has been causing me to land early.
Basically my XC paragliding skill levels or results didn't increase much since flying my Delta 2, with the extra workload to get the glider feeling efficient being the main factor. I've been flying long enough that I'm not hungry for airtime or distance at any cost. If I'm not enjoying myself on an XC flight, I just go and land in a spot convenient for retrieve. Maybe I'm getting lazy, I haven't had a long retrieve walk in years! But that also means I've cut a few flights short where I was more than capable of handling the conditions or the location I found myself in, but just wasn't enjoying the flying the glider that much.
So far the shortlist is down to four:
Nivuik Artik 5
The Artik 5 is probably the glider that based on what the manufacturer chose to highlight fits my flying style and what I want in a paraglider the most. "On your adventures, stability is your best companion. Thanks to unrivalled damping and rigidity in the air, the wing will always remain solid both when accelerated and in rough air, allowing you always to feel comfortable." Pilot review on their website: "What I liked most about the Artik 5 is damping in comparison to the Artik 4. It is a wing that moves much less when you fly in very strong thermals. I also really like its rigidity in the leading edge, allowing you to accelerate more with incredible stability".It's beautiful looking with the lime green "Cherimoya" and bright orange "Hardos" color schemes both being stunning. I also really like the fact that the underside and topside are both the same color, something that seems to be out of fashion on modern wings.
66 cells and aspect ration 6.3. It does not look like a glider with a 6.3 aspect ratio. The Queen 2 for instance appears much longer.
Nivuik Artik 5 with it's 66 cells and split trailing edge cells, giving it a beautifully clean lines. Color scheme is the dramatic "cherimoya"
Advance Sigma 10
According to cross country magazine, this is possibly Advance's best glider ever. Great results from the Rat Race last year from hard charging Christo Johnson made it clear this glider can be flown all day on on speedbar even in the windy convergence lines typical at Woodrat Mountain. Aaron Price from our local SoCal XCLeague is also flying one after trying and rejecting the Delta 3. However, one of my local pilot friends is falling out of love with his due to the soft leading edge being more prone to frontal collapses than his Delta 2. He recently also had an accident on it, breaking his arm badly, and I haven't talked to him about whether he feels the glider had anything to do with what happened. My local sites all typically have quite bumpy conditions throughout the summer, with strong sudden wind gusts of 35 - 40 km/h being quite common at altitude. In the Delta 2 these tend to be experienced as the glider pitching back as the gust comes through, then unweighting as it passes, but actual collapse is really rare. In three years flying my Delta 2, I've only ever had two frontals, and both had zero warning, and resulted in the glider just disappearing behind me before I had even time to make any corrective action to prevent them. For those conditions a really solid leading edge gives more confidence and I think cuts through the gusts.66 cells and aspect ration 6.16
The design is typical non-descript Swissness, the color schemes meh, so not really a serious contender. The thing I like most is the backpack....
No great changes in design or shaping from Advance.
It's distinctive in the sky if rather uninspiring, projecting Swiss understated confidence.
Ozone Delta 3
After flying my Delta 1 and then moving to a Delta 2, the Delta 3 might be my logical choice for brand loyalty. Local pilots all seem to love them and they look racy and advanced looking in the air, but I have feel a for a change. Ozone claims that the Delta 3 has 'More precise handling, better agility, and a sharper feel' which is all well and good, but possibly not what I am looking for. My Delta 2 was plenty agile enough, and in fact the 'agility' for me translated as too much yaw, pitch and general workload in too many flying situations.
Both on glide and in thermals I found the Delta 2 felt solid, but just required too many minor control to feel like it was climbing or gliding at peak efficiency. And it moved around too much to make me feel comfortable flying without hands on the toggles. I'm looking for a wing the takes everything in it's stride and smooths out the air, allowing me to concentrate on using more speedbar more often with less stress, and to climb at maximum efficiency with minimum effort. I always felt the Delta 2 took constant adjustment to carve a consistent turn in windy conditions and broken thermals.
New colors and top surface are are up to Ozone's proud history of bold color schemes.
66 cells and 6.0 aspect ratio, with a more rounded shape.Both on glide and in thermals I found the Delta 2 felt solid, but just required too many minor control to feel like it was climbing or gliding at peak efficiency. And it moved around too much to make me feel comfortable flying without hands on the toggles. I'm looking for a wing the takes everything in it's stride and smooths out the air, allowing me to concentrate on using more speedbar more often with less stress, and to climb at maximum efficiency with minimum effort. I always felt the Delta 2 took constant adjustment to carve a consistent turn in windy conditions and broken thermals.
New colors and top surface are are up to Ozone's proud history of bold color schemes.
Size ML - 85 - 105kg.
Ozone keeps to their tie-dye look from the underside.
Look carefully at the bunching of the trailing edge compared to the cleaner look of the Artik 5 with similar amounts of brake.
Triple Seven Queen 2
The Queen 2 seems to have some interesting technology, including a riser system that pulls down on the B riser when the C is pulled down using the C-loops. The theory is that this makes it more like a two liner, allowing the whole glider angle of attack to adjust, rather than bending down the back third of the glider using just the C line attachment points. This interests me because in turbulent air, I've never felt comfortable just using the C loops to steer my Delta 2. It's fine in smooth air, but as soon as the air gets a bit rough flying with the C risers just doesn't seem to give fine enough control inputs, and I'm quickly back to using the brakes to get the amount of control I need to feel comfortable.
Triple Seven is supremely confident in their marketing for the Queen 2, with my interpretation being that they are looking for pilots willing to fly quite aggressively.
"The Queen 2 is purpose-built to win Sport-class trophies in competitions all over the world. The Sports class is the new Serial class for pilots unwilling to accept the risk levels in Serial and Open class competitions, and for these pilots, as well as for pilots wanting to go on big XC adventures, the Queen 2 is nothing short of the perfect choice. In spite of the very high performance of this wing it is still a “solid” EN C wing with no surprises built in."
With 73 cells, 6.3 aspect ratio, it's visually the most 'aspecty' looking glider, with more of a D class appearance.
Triple Seven is supremely confident in their marketing for the Queen 2, with my interpretation being that they are looking for pilots willing to fly quite aggressively.
"The Queen 2 is purpose-built to win Sport-class trophies in competitions all over the world. The Sports class is the new Serial class for pilots unwilling to accept the risk levels in Serial and Open class competitions, and for these pilots, as well as for pilots wanting to go on big XC adventures, the Queen 2 is nothing short of the perfect choice. In spite of the very high performance of this wing it is still a “solid” EN C wing with no surprises built in."
With 73 cells, 6.3 aspect ratio, it's visually the most 'aspecty' looking glider, with more of a D class appearance.
Queen 7 with slightly less clean shape than Delta 3 or Artik 5.
Plus a color scheme I cannot reallly get excited about...
