![]() ![]() Don't listen to that BS, unless a local mentor has offered to teach you for a very reasonable charge. There are fly-by night instructors who will tell you that you need to purchase your own equipment before you receive lessons. They have the big Wills Wing Alpha 210 that should be good for your weight (150-280 lbs hook-in weight).ĭon't get suckered into purchasing your equipment before you've had some real air-time lessons. However, if you are still planning to train at LMFP, you will not need to purchase a glider to train on. (For reference, I weigh around 225 lbs in excellent physical shape, clothed) He also suggested if I couldn't find a Freedom, a Falcon would do just fine, so I found a nice, nearly-new Falcon 3 195 for less than half-price of a new Falcon 4. The tandem Falcon is relatively easy to find. The Freedom 190 is almost a needle in the haystack search. They are out there, you just have to look. My mentor suggested I find something that was previously owned with little wear and tear. and no one argues the Sport 2 glides better than the Freedom when you pull the VG tight. I find them easier to fly VG off, lighter or comparable weight, and less expensive than the "full race" Freedom. But not so slick that I'd pay more, to work harder and fly less If I want performance, and I'm willing to spend more money, and spend more time setting up, I'd buy a Sport 2. I get that people like them, and I agree they look slick. Can't speak for pitch stability because it's not certified. It's less yaw-damped, and less roll-stable than the Falcon. And to gain that slightly better glide (assuming it does what they say it does), the owners have to pay more money, put more battens in and out every time they fly it, put curved tips in and out, and deal with a heavier glider. And if it does, it certainly aint a big difference. It might go a little better than a Falcon at higher speeds, but no one's been able to PROVE that. It takes all of the compromises we accept in a higher performing (better gliding) glider, and incorporates them into a single-surface glider that will always be significantly handicapped in glide performance. Not that it isn't a fine glider- I just think the premise is *STUPID*. then a so-called "higher performance" glider is, well, NOT higher performance at all.ĭisclaimer here is that I hate the Freedom. so if you're not concerned with trying to fly from A to B quickly, or losing the least possible amount of altitude while doing it. so again, the Falcon is higher performance there. and the Falcon sets up and breaks down a LOT faster, often leading to more airtime for me when I choose that wing for the day's flying. The Falcon is much lighter weight than my T2C. so again the Falcon could be considered much higher performance. Launching and landing is way easier, and requires a lot less running (launch) and runway (landing). so in terms of soaring performance, most days the Falcon could easily be called higher performance than the T2C. the Falcon flies slower, with makes soaring a lot easier. Here's the funniest part- I have a Falcon, and a T2C with every option (high performance racing glider). And I'm sort of guessing at the numbers, because hang glider manufacturers don't have access to wind tunnels, and don't like to publish numbers because obtaining concrete reliable flight data in the "real world" there's just too many variables. and the "highest performance" flex wing might be approaching 20:1 at best. So a Falcon might have, say, an 8:1 glide. which is how far the glider moves forward for every foot it descends through the air. In hang gliding there's this funny thing, where "high performance" really only refers to GLIDE performance. It's also more forgiving, so if you make a mistake during launch or landing, you'll have better odds of "getting away with it" versus the alternative Falcon is lighter, easier (as in, less effort and less skill required). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |