Niviuk Artik R 2 size 23

NIviuk Artik R 2 size 23

I have already flown all Artik series, from the first one to this year's 2025 model, and now I have the Artik R 2, the new release two liner EN-C glider from Niviuk.

In this review, I will describe the glider and highlight the differences between the Artik R1 and R2, as well as the Artik 7 P, a hybrid released in 2025.

The Artik R2 construction and details are flawless, just like Niviuk's latest models. With a very nice manufacturing process, it looks clean, like a Swiss watch. Or should I say like a Spanish Andalusian Flamenco :-) To stay close to the origin ;-)

The glider invites you to fly it, just by looking at it. The outer bag and the small details are elegant. 

The A-R2 has an aspect ratio of 6.5, and even in no wind, it requires a steady but smooth pull if you lay it properly. In a 15 km/h wind, the launch is also smooth, but you feel that the Artik R2 doesn’t rise as a block; it needs a controllable but easy and smooth touch to get that structure above your head, especially if the breeze at the take isn’t steady. It stays within the C class in launch control. 

The structure is different from the first Artik R version. There has been a high amount of work inside that glider, and it feels that way. It feels more compact, but in like three pieces. Let me explain: It doesn’t feel like one whole block, like some stiff, high-end C gliders. It feels more like three stiff parts working together.

The take off is immediate at 92 all up on the size 23, which has a range of 75-95 all up.

First, the brake travel is short and a bit firm. The A-R1 had longer brakes. The A-R 2 has shorter ones, which are direct but have a performance radius. I think it is pretty logical to make such a turn if you are going to use that glider in XC. Otherwise, you can get the A-7 P, which has slightly more dynamic and joyful characteristics, as well as quicker turns.  Saying that the A-R 2 has a precise brake and good authority for the pilot, a bit better than the Artik R-1, especially in strong air. You can turn it with 10-15 cm in all conditions. However, lowering a bit to 20-25 is doable, but a bit harder under pressure. 

Climb rate:  I think the best feature of the Artik R-2 is its climb rate. I think it's brilliant. In weak, and in strong, the A-R2 shoots quickly upward! In my C comparison, I think the rate of the climb would be at the top Cs of

Today's Gliders. 

Stability: In strong air, the old AR-1 structure moves within itself. The new A-R 2 shows a significant improvement over the first version. While it still has some minor movements, it is more taut than the previous version.

In turbulent and intense conditions, the A-R 2 is a different beast from the first version. It is a step up in feeling like positively flying in a higher class without the workload.  

Glide: We did some long glides with a Photon of the same size and load. Perhaps the A-R2 has a 0.25 km/h lower trim speed, but at full bar, it is as fast as, or possibly 0.5 km/h faster than, the Photon. The glide at trim and top speed is within the top 5 of the C category. 

While pushing the speed bar, which has moderate pressure, the B handles are efficient, not hard to control, have good pressure, and are easy to use overall. 

IMHO, the A-R 2 in size 23 is best flown near 92-93. I think after a few more hours, that glider will settle, and you can load it to 94 and stay connected with all its features.

My C comparison will be shortly updated for small details.

Conclusion: More compact than the A-R1, better coordinated handling for performance gain in a turn. Relatively easy/moderate for a 6.5 AR glider. Has much top-end speed. Easier to fly than a few high-end Cs.

OZONE Alpina GT S (65-85)

Ozone Alpina GT ( The Yogi) 

Ozone introduced the Alpina GT, a three-line concept with a six-to-one aspect ratio for 2025. Many pilots ask why.  There’s the new two-liner Delta 5, and also later, the light Alpina 5 will emerge. 

So, why go to a three-line concept? Not even a hybrid! Perhaps a little at the last 2 meters. Who is this glider for? 

Let me explain the Alpina GT in full detail. 

The glider has a lightweight construction, weighing around 4.25 kg. The risers are traditional, rigid webbing risers and a bit heavy. Perhaps, Ozone may offer a lighter riser option.

Launching the Alpina GT S size 65-85 at 83 is super easy. Straightforward and calm.

In the air, with the F-Race2, the brake travel is moderate in length and reacts promptly to steer the glider. I can describe the turn as flat, super smooth, agile, while being tamed at the same time. The Alpina GT doesn't dive in turns. The Alpina GT S size requires a slight, steady pull on the brakes when turning because it will flatten even more. Overall, I can describe the turning abilities as having high smoothness and being easy to steer.  It is very forgiving if you pull the brake line a bit lower when needed, sometimes. 

The climb rate in weak air is perfect and similar to that of the Alpina 4, which was excellent.  One day, we experienced strong conditions at our lower site, with some north-east wind blowing in. That made for a tough day flying. While high B gliders experienced some collapses, it was a good workout for us to maintain our gliders overhead. Under the Alpina GT, I managed to keep that glider open and never experienced a collapse in those not-so-friendly environments. I got 7.2 m/s thermals on the lee side! You can imagine what strength this one has! While keeping that glider well inflated, I was super relaxed under the Alpina GT! 

And somehow…I was psychologically happy, because under these rough conditions, you think:

’If it collapses while I’m low, I think it will be easier to manage it.”  Or, on a two-liner, from higher classes, you think, “ If it collapses, while I’m low, I think it will be hot to manage it.”   

That is a logical behavior of pilot instincts. That’s why OZONE chose to keep the Alpina GT on the menu. It's for those critical moments when you need to fly a C-class glider, but without the stress. 

The internal structure is stuck together firmly and gives an impression of high passive safety, much like any(tamed) High B glider! 

That’s how I felt underneath that glider.

There’s an important matter that I'd like to discuss with you.

Suppose any manufacturer wants to push the limits of any type or class of gliders, whether it's a two liner or a three liner….Wouldn’t they strive to take the concept to its extreme, staying within certification while also being competitive and delivering a flyable glider that aligns with their image and understanding?

This is too much to acheive for any manufacturer, and yet they are pushing. 

What if it were to deliver one glider without that stress? A refined concept. Wouldn’t they provide a smooth, “balanced" glider? That’s the Alpina GT.

A C-class glider for everyday use, for Alpine conditions, with some 80 hours of experience for pilots.  Grass for the needy ;-) 

Now, some pilots would ask: So why should I buy that kind of C if I can get a high B? 

Answer: Because of the difference when gliding in a difficult airmass facing a valley breeze, that C will push you slightly further than some high B’s and will react as a higher class should   (even slightly) 

I will surely also get that question: What are the differences between the Artik 7 P S and the Alpina GT S ?  (Both 65-85 weight range)

Answer: The handling and braking authority on the A7 is short, linear, firm, and super direct. The Alpina GT handles very well, with slightly longer brake inputs and softer reactions. But still very agile.

The inside structure feels tougher on the Alpina GT and more compact. In moving air, the A7 P communicates by rolling 30 % more than the Alpina GT. I like the A7 P for its intuitive, direct handling and dance feel, but I also had a lot of fun flying effortlessly in the Alpina GT in those rough conditions. It's like driving a BMW Z4 (A7-P) versus a Mercedes E-Class (Alpina GT).   

Gliding: Don’t expect to match the glide of the 2-line concept Delta 5.  But I understand that a pilot buying an Alpina GT is not aiming to compete in the serial class, for example.  He will choose, for that matter, the Delta 5 or the Photon. 

The top speed is around 15 km/h over trim…Ears are stable. They do not open automatically and require pilot intervention. 

 The B/C system works perfectly to stabilize the glider overhead when the speed bar is pushed. Not as 2 liners, but close enough. 

Induced collapses are easy to reopen and have a soft feel. 

Conclusion: 

The Alpina GT targets pilots who don’t want to venture on a two-liner, and believe that this three-line concept has already been tested and validated for over 10 years. I can assure you that those pilots will get what they hoped for in terms of passive safety, good performance, nice handling, and overall a smiley face at the landing zone.  Happy flights, 

GIN GTO 3 (ttwienada) (go-seongneung) in Korean ;-)

GIN GTO 3  (ttwienada) (go-seongneung)  in Korean ;-)   

When I was in France at the Coupe Icare, I met Mr. Gin for a meeting to discuss future GIN products. Gin was very excited about the GTO 3, as his goal was to achieve the best performance from an EN-C glider, particularly at high speeds. 

And after seven months, I was able to purchase the GTO 3. 

Wave leading edge on that design with quite a few thin lines. Lying it on the ground showed me an elegant construction. The leading edge is made from Dominico 30DMF 41g², and the rest of the upper surface is made with Myungjin, MJ29MF 29g², as well as the lower surface. Lines are a mix of Edelrid lines. 

Launching the GTO 3 requires a steady pull in nil wind. It comes up slowly, but evenly. In stronger air above 20 km/h, it rises quickly and needs a good dab on the brakes to keep it above your head, as all high-performance gliders do. 

I have flown the GTO 3 size S (80-95) from 91 to 97, to understand that my best feel was near the top at 94,95. 

I took my time with the GTO 3, as I was intrigued by its performance and usability. So, after some time flying it in different areas at 95 all up, here’s my personal opinion about it.

Let's first talk about the handling. The GTO 3 gave me a different feel in various conditions, and that's what I'm sharing.

In the air:

When conditions are moderate, with acceptable or mild turbulence, and no wind, even with 3 m/s thermals, the agility and brake authority are excellent under the GTO 3. The pressure on the brakes is slightly on the moderate side in those conditions, and the reactivity of the brakes allows the pilot to control, feel the pressure, and guide the glider through the air.  

In those specific conditions, the GTO 3 has the upper hand over the Photon and Lyght in terms of handling, thanks to its precise and direct control. 

Now flying it in rough air, in windy days, even at 95 all up, the feel is a bit different. My first feedback changed slightly after some strong days flying it...Sometimes, it was a bit reluctant to turn immediately as it did in mild air. However, the feel of the brakes is still present, and they control the glider flawlessly above the pilot's head, keeping it in line. It just needs a bit more time to settle (in turbulent thermals), and then you can push the brakes to turn it. While doing that self-settlement, the GTO 3 keeps pushing forward and up! I will comment on that behavior later on performance. However, in turbulent and strong air, it needs a skilled, high-C pilot to keep it at bay. Of course, it is not a Bonanza 3. 

Climb rate:

During my time test flying it, I have read comments from fellow pilots and listened to my friends' opinions. My feeling about the GTO 3 is that it has the edge in climb in the C class. But I will surely explain what I mean.

On a day with light 1m/s to 2m/s thermals, when flying the GTO 3 next to my friends on their same-size Photon/Lyght and with an exact load of 94 over 95, I sensed that the GTO 3 gave me the magical power to achieve a floating edge through a difficult airmass. It was always easy to surf upward!. While the actual two-liner C will take some time to dig through in those light conditions, the GTO 3 is a half step up. But that also has its price…later… ( I’m trying to make some suspense :-) 

On stronger air and windy days, the climb rate appears similar to that of the Photon. 

Gliding:

The GTO 3 has the best glide of any EN-C glider to date. Period. I have tried and tried and tried. There’s a slight edge in glide at trim and at half bar. Perhaps at full bar I can say it's very close to the Photon. But at trim, half bar, I had a slight edge. All my friends confirmed my thoughts upon those glides.

For me, gliding under the GTO 3 felt like another step up in moving air. It always goes in (dolphin-mode). It is more like throwing a flat, rounded stone horizontally into a lake. The feel is like that. It jumps upward and forward. At least it's how I felt…

Usability:

Everything in this life has its price. While having the best glide and climb, after flying it in all conditions, the GTO 3 is also a slight step up from the Photon. Not much, but still needs some + 10 % pilot load, especially in strong air. Because the leading edge keeps searching up and forward, and the pilot needs more time to understand the balance between letting it fly and holding it a bit. A matter of trust, I think that comes with time... The homogeneity and solid structure (feel) are similar to an EN-C class. Still, the pilot demand in strong air feels somewhat closer to its older sister, the GTO2, rather than the Camino 2, if I remember correctly. However, the GTO 3 is certified EN-C and will logically behave accordingly within that box. 

The top speed is around 17 km/h on that model I have here. Ears are best done with outer B’s, with acceptable sink for that class. 

While on the bar, the pressure on the B handles is on the firm side. They can control the glider well, and with time, after understanding the glider's behavior, this feature will be highly more efficient. 

Conclusion:

An exceptional glider. I never had any collapse so far, perhaps because I was always controlling it, and waiting for it to settle before making my moves.

 The eye-opening glides, the low saves, and the handling are from a class above. You will ask me if it has the glide of a Zeno 2…I know..you will…So I don’t think that when pushing the speed bar headwind, it will. But somewhere between the Photon and the Zeno 2. Perhaps you will also ask if it needs pilot control like the Zeno 2?  No, less. Again, between the Zeno 2 and the Photon.

So?  How are You? Are you looking for an A-class glider with Boom performance? C’mon…Let's face it. 

The GTO 3 has everything a good C pilot needs to win comps and fly the longest XC without complaint. A flawless dream glider that requires a good pilot to extract those performances. 

It doesn't need too much for a high-C-class glider, but it still demands respect.

If you’re in doubt, there’s the excellent Camino 2, which doesn’t lack anything! 

Otherwise, the GTO 3 awaits you passionately.

OZONE F-Race 2 size M

Hi,
I'm currently testing the F*Race 2 in size M.
I'm also making a video about it. It should be released in the next few days, if the weather is bad for flying.   😀
https://www.instagram.com/p/DLb7jWgIfyt/

The F-Race 2 is more stable than the Forza 1, especially when the ABS is tightened, which is a notable feature of this harness. There's also a chest strap adjustment to enhance stability further. You can even loosen up to make it super sweet to roll and fly!
The F-Race 2 is far from Forza 2 in every way. Pilots who didn't blend into Forza 2 for some reason will find that the F-Race 2 has a different configuration.
You can sit upright and also recline.
The ABS can be easily adjusted in the air by pulling the corresponding strings. (The video will show every option)
The shoulder straps are also easily adjustable.
The seating position was comfortable for me, and my legs were naturally supported. I am flying the M-size F-Race 2. The Arrow-P Large suits me slightly better than the Arrow-P M. I think that for my weight of 72 kg and 1.81 cm, the F-Race 2 sits in the middle of those sizes.
Regarding the back comfort comparison, I found that the comfort on the F-Race 2 is excellent, and it largely depends on the pilot's body configuration to achieve a better fit.
The rear fairing is positioned high behind the pilot's head and appears aerodynamically sleek.
The back storage is wide and more than enough for that type of harness.
The back protection inflates very quickly with the supplied small pump (approximately 20 seconds). There's a bag to help if the batteries run out, or you can inflate it with a running tube near the shoulder strap.
The video will show all those options.
Stay tuned for more on that nice harness!
Happy flights,
Ziad.

MACPARA Eden 8 23

MACPARA Eden 8 

The EDEN 8 is Macpara’s new high-B glider for the 2025/26 or possibly the 27 season. 

I have the size 23 (70-90) here. 

The Eden 8 is a semi-light glider with a 3/2 hybrid line configuration. The construction and details are nice on that glider. The work on the leading edge is fantastic, and Nitinol rods were used inside that glider.

I flew the Eden 8 in higher mountains and difficult conditions, as well as on other sites below the inversion, with some challenging moments. Now, after a while, I can write my review precisely.

Launching the 5.93 Eden 8 as a high B glider is very straightforward, without any hard points or even surges. For a high pilot, it's a non-event.

I flew the glider from 84 to 88 to understand that it could fly well at those weights, but I sensed that flying it at 87 all up is the sweet spot for XC flights.

Handling and maneuverability:

The Eden 8 at 87 has around 12 cm of gap before the action on the trailing edge. The brake pressure is light for the first 10 cm, then moderate from 10 to 20 cm, allowing the pilot to fly the glider with minimal effort.  The Eden 8 can be smoothly adjusted from 10 to 15 cm inside a thermal. You can even crank it lower for a more dynamic turn, and still, the Eden 8 allows it easily. 

The handling is linear, precise, responsive, and quite agile, with minimum dive into a turn.

That’s why I was very efficient in thermals, with a high authority to guide the glider into the best climbing part of a thermal. 

Climb rate and efficiency:

As you all know, I thoroughly test my gliders next to other (benchmark) gliders, to better understand each glider's potential. And I assure you, I am very picky on that part!

To be precise, I must state that the size 23 flew at 87 all up, next to my reference gliders, which were also flown at their optimum flying weight. I must mention that, despite being a bit reluctant on the weak climb of my last Mac C class model, I was keen and curious to see what the Eden 8 has to offer.

To my delight, and also a relief, this Eden 8 surpasses my expectations for climb efficiency in weak air! But…That’s not all…

The Eden 8 joins the elite high-B gliders in the (floatability mode) when cruising. (We will discuss further down that nice behavior)

Flying next to the best high-B climber from a larger size also showed us that the Eden 8 doesn’t lack at all in that process, but keeps itself at the top of the climb efficiency. 

Glide and efficiency:

Now in 2025, there’s no glide angle. No more glide number. There’s only an efficiency number when gliding into the airmass. And that’s the glider that will take us far in XC mode.

Therefore, doing those tiring glides in turbulent air is very difficult because you don’t want a strong thermal day, but rather some weak to moderate lift under the inversion, coupled with a front valley breeze. That’s my cocktail to see which glider moves forward and climbs better at the same time. That’s why those glides are done many times.

Afterward, we both agree (Elie and I) that this Eden 8 behaves efficiently like a new 3-line C-class glider. The glide of the Eden 8 joins the best, and could replace my reference.   

I like the way it enters the airmass and moves forward, without losing its glide.

The glide at trim speed is like the best high-B, the glide at first bar is slightly better! The glide at full bar is somewhat less. 

A reminder that I was one size smaller than my reference. And we were both with the same Niviuk Arrow harnesses. 

When activating the speed bar, the C handles have a moderate pressure, easy access, and are efficient in controlling the glider in most situations.

Stability and homogeneity:

The Eden 8 felt like having a strong structure. I never had any collapse during the tests. The roll felt a bit slightly more than the Rush 6 and less than the Maestro 2. It informs the pilot politely, without being dull. For me, I like those movements because I understand the airmass better. If I remember correctly, the Eden 8 moves a bit more than the Eden 7, but it’s still a docile performance glider to control.

The pitch looks pretty neutral, with an excellent cut through the airmass for a high-B glider! 

Ears are easy to get, stable, and they reopen without pilot intervention! 

The top speed is around 14-15 km/h over trim. 

Conclusion:

The Eden 8 is a semi-light, agile, and pleasurable-handling high-performance glider. Enough to take the high-B pilot far on XC without wanting anything more.

A small reminder about today’s high-B gliders is that they are achieving the performance of non-certified prototypes from 12 years ago—all that with a B-class rating. 

How lucky we are to enjoy them! Fly safe  

Ziad

 

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. 

NIVIUK Hiko-P

NIVIUK Hiko P size 22

After some good learning hours on an A glider, a friend got her new Hiko and was keen to know what it would be like in comparison to another B glider. Since I can fly the size 22 at 84 all up, I got a brand new Hiko P, which is the light version of the original Hiko.
Construction and details are excellent on today’s Niviuk gliders, and the Hiko P is no different with that light cloth.
My first pink-colored Hiko with my Arrow P at 84 standing on launch.
Even in nil wind, the glider inflates flawlessly. In light wind, it's so straightforward to launch. The light fabric inflates well, and the Hiko rises above my head, waiting for me to step forward.

Usually, and 90% of the time, when I fly low-rated gliders, I don’t expect to be satisfied by the reactivity of the glider. First turn under the Hiko P and I’m already amazed by that brake smoothness and coordination. The HIko-P is an agile mid-B glider with amazing turning abilities. It can core tightly any thermal, without hesitation.
Light to moderate brake pressure, with linear and direct brake response enabled me to guide that glider everywhere I wanted in turbulence and inside thermals.
That light Mid-EN-B glider gave me and to my surprise a very nice time testing it handling-wise. A pure joy to steer in the air.

The climb rate is on the high side under that glider. Even though I was on the top end, the Hiko-P climbed very well, and I think I could place it easily among the best ones in that category. In strong thermals, there’s no high-pitch back considering that category. On the contrary, it slips through the air smoothly but, of course, slowly compared to the upper classes.
Gliding through some difficult air surprised me with the Hiko-P's ability to dig through slowly but efficiently! The Hiko-P behaves quite nicely in the turbulent airmass with a highly homogenous feel, and a very good efficient profile for a mid-B glider.
The feedback is smooth are well balanced with the right amount of feedback, without any parasital movements, letting the pilot concentrate on his flight.

Speed over trim is around 11 km/h at 900 ASL. Ears are stable, easy to induce, and efficient.

Conclusion:
For me to land with a smile on a mid-B is rare. Because when you fly higher-rated gliders that give you that extra efficiency, you will feel grounded in flying lower gliders sometimes. It wasn't the case flying the Hiko-P as it delivered above expectations glide and climb, and above all excellent handling with smoothness in turns, which resulted in a big smile after landing!
I think that glider can be flown as the main glider for (low-mid EN-B) pilots looking for a comfortable, easy to use, light, compact to pack, well mannered, hike and fly glider, without losing on performance and especially on fun!