0
Deimian

New Icarus X-Fire

Recommended Posts

https://www.facebook.com/Icarusworld/videos/1471057502917912/

Looks similar to Fluid Wing's Tesla. "Schumanny" planform, partially closed nose, inflatable stabilizers. Unfortunately it is nothing more than a promotional video, so I have no idea how it compares to Crossfire 2, Crossfire 3, Tesla or Katana. It seems like it has a somewhat long recovery arc, but it is very difficult to say from the video. It also seems like a Tesla contender for most beautiful non-crossbraced wing :P.

I was leaning towards Tesla as my next wing, but without demos in Europe I might give priority to this one if it turns out to be a worthy canopy. Fluid Wings, are you sure you don't want to reconsider having a demo program in Europe? Hit me up if you need help to set it up ;) Interesting times!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This canopy is going to mess up people's shorthand writing of the Crossfire 1, 2 & 3 and lead to loads of confusion!

On the FB for sale pages, always see people selling their xfire... in a while the first response will be "is it an xfire1, xfire2, xfire3, or x-fire?"

Too similar names, but then they have to be when it is aiming to ride on the success of the crossfire 2!

Looks nice though.
Sky Switches - Affordable stills camera tongue switches and conversion adaptors, supporting various brands of camera (Canon, Sony, Nikon, Panasonic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Crossfire2 pilot here. Just jumped the Xfire today. Had to tell someone. Anyone. I've got her for a few more days.

Everything I wished a crossfire2 was. Sooooo sexy.

Flare is lower in the toggles so you can get forward in the harness without accidental toggle input.

Dives longer the more you tickle her sweet spot, unlike the crossfire2 that just loads up no matter what. Wooooo she's a giver. Trimmed steeper than the crossfire2 for sure, but not katana steep.

Opening in the video was exactly the same as in person.

Oooooooooh! Sooo stoked for the next couple of days with her. Im F#*king buying one as soon as they're out. I was stoked on the tesla and now I don't care. Woooooooooooohoooooooooo!

Will report back after more jumps.

Titties

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was hoping to try the tesla since their wings seem to have good harness response. I'm sold on the x-fire.

Care free openings. Slider stays high on opening and the canopy just flys for a second before the slider comes down. Nothing off heading more than 90 degrees.

Fronts are WAY more responsive than the crossfire 2 and there is way more power. "Snappy". If you tell it to go it goes! I was laughing my ass off for an entire high pull.

Its easier to be quiet in the harness than the crossfire 2, but when you get on it she'll give you everything you want. The power just builds and builds. The crossfire2 feels responsive but just loads up once you lean into it.

Rears are good. The crossfire 2 rears are more snappy, but only because its trimmed so flat and it doesn't dive long enough to build any real power.

Overall, both canopies being 119@1.8, the crossfire2 feels like a turd. The x-fire is pretty intuitive and the power it can generate is surprising. Definately a stepping stone. Glad I dialed in the crossfire2 first, but glad I don't have to deal with its flat trimmed crap anymore.

Buy one of these as soon as it hits the market.

Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looking at their facebook post:
https://www.facebook.com/Icarusworld/photos/a.549799728377032.127580.538444502845888/1549053748451620/?type=3&theater

which quotes:
Quote


Introducing the ultimate gateway canopy.

The X Fire... performances previously only seen in crossbraced canopies and superb openings true to it's heritage, the X Fire is undoubtedly creating a new class of ultra high performance, non-crossbraced wings.

Canopy Pilot: Dusty Smith
Canopy: X Fire 75, Load 2.5



and especially at the wingload of 2.5 it seems pretty clear, that the X-Fire will play in a different class than the Crossfire2 / Crossfire3 which have a suggested maximum wingloading of 2.1/2.0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand. How can a canopy that is "creating a new class of ultra high performance [...] wings" be at the same time a "gateway canopy"? And what is the point of having a WL of 2.5 in a non-crossbraced canopy?

The description seems to show a canopy more aggressive than a katana, which for some people is already on the edge of reasonable aggressiveness for non-crossbraced canopies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to that description it seems to be more aggressive than Fluid Wing's Tesla (recommended for people with at least 500 jumps vs X-Fire's 800), and than Katana (recommended WL between 1.3 and 1.9). PD is usually pretty conservative, but still.....

Another thing to consider is that the recovery arc is shorter than cross-braced canopies, so in theory it is not as steep as the Katana, and should have a shorter recovery arc as well.

I've never jumped any of these, but I'll try to give it a shot to a Katana 120 (WL ~1.51) and a X-Fire 113-124 (~1.45-1.6) this summer during a boogie. Maybe then I can give my impressions.

If it is that aggressive I guess I'll take something more conservative as my next canopy, particularly if I get it one size smaller than my current one. I don't want to go from a relatively "docile" canopy (Sabre 2 120) to a "ultra high performance wing" in a single step :|

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

This is also why the X-Fire has a minimum requirement of 400 total jumps and 200 jumps annually. Currency is mandatory. However, at this level of reactivity and performance 800 jumps is what we believe to be the benchmark to really experience the caliber of performance the X-Fire can offer.



I wonder how many people jumping this canopy over the next few seasons will satisfy the currency and jump numbers recommendations/rules!
Sky Switches - Affordable stills camera tongue switches and conversion adaptors, supporting various brands of camera (Canon, Sony, Nikon, Panasonic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you could find a 119 x-fire, you'd enjoy going to it from a sabre2 120. Sabre2 135 to crossfire2 119 was good and bad for me. I liked the rears, but it was trimmed too flat, coming from the sabre2. The recovery arc was dramatically shorter than the sabre2. The crossfire 2 was strict, in that it had a very narrow altitude window in which to initiate your turn. It just loaded up so fast, so it was hard to prolong your turn. I could force the sabre2 to keep diving if I needed to, which was nice. The crossfire2 would recover positively if I really wound it up. Really f*$king annoying. The X-fire is my first wing that gives me everything I want. It's not intimidating, but should be respected.

On a 119 @ 1.8 it has power, but I still had to give full input. However, it does demand smooth controlled inputs. If you tug a front too quick, the wing will respond and snap in that direction faster than it can translate through your lines and to you. It felt like an extension of my body within 3 jumps, but I've still kept my turns high, looking for more power to keep it diving... just so I don't accidentally find it later on.

To whoever said "how can it be a transitional canopy if its in its own class" or however they worded it, I believe they were aiming to make a stepping stone to cross braced wings. I'll let you know when I get on a cross braced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
CloudCompanion

If you could find a 119 x-fire, you'd enjoy going to it from a sabre2 120. Sabre2 135 to crossfire2 119 was good and bad for me. I liked the rears, but it was trimmed too flat, coming from the sabre2. The recovery arc was dramatically shorter than the sabre2.



Really? That's interesting. Most people comment that the recovery arc of Sabre 2 and Crossfire 2 is very similar. I flew a couple of times a Crossfire 2 and I had the similar feeling, but I didn't do any exhaustive testing.

CloudCompanion

The X-fire is my first wing that gives me everything I want. It's not intimidating, but should be respected.



Have you flown a Katana? If so, how would you compare both?

CloudCompanion

To whoever said "how can it be a transitional canopy if its in its own class" or however they worded it, I believe they were aiming to make a stepping stone to cross braced wings. I'll let you know when I get on a cross braced.



I made that comment. But my wording was more like "how can it be a transitional canopy if it is creating a new class of ultra high performance wings". My point was about being ultra high performance. An ultra high performance stepping stone doesn't make much sense in my opinion. Maybe it is simply a marketing gimmick that turned out to be too bold?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deimian

***If you could find a 119 x-fire, you'd enjoy going to it from a sabre2 120. Sabre2 135 to crossfire2 119 was good and bad for me. I liked the rears, but it was trimmed too flat, coming from the sabre2. The recovery arc was dramatically shorter than the sabre2.



Really? That's interesting. Most people comment that the recovery arc of Sabre 2 and Crossfire 2 is very similar. I flew a couple of times a Crossfire 2 and I had the similar feeling, but I didn't do any exhaustive testing.

CloudCompanion

The X-fire is my first wing that gives me everything I want. It's not intimidating, but should be respected.



Have you flown a Katana? If so, how would you compare both?

CloudCompanion

To whoever said "how can it be a transitional canopy if its in its own class" or however they worded it, I believe they were aiming to make a stepping stone to cross braced wings. I'll let you know when I get on a cross braced.



I made that comment. But my wording was more like "how can it be a transitional canopy if it is creating a new class of ultra high performance wings". My point was about being ultra high performance. An ultra high performance stepping stone doesn't make much sense in my opinion. Maybe it is simply a marketing gimmick that turned out to be too bold?

You can't just ignore some of the words in the sentence:
"creating a new class of ultra high performance, non-crossbraced wings"

I have no idea if this is true or not, but the semantics are clearly different than "creating a new class of ultra high performance wings".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When I downsized to the crossfire2 I immediately noticed how much faster the fronts loaded up. It had a much shallower glide as well. It took me a good 40 jumps to get my brain to allow me to crank a 180 at 400 feet. Even now, if I watch someone do a perfect 180 on a crossfire2 it looks stupid low. The sabre2 felt more ground hungry, but wasn't as strict, for me. If my set up and turn weren't just right, I could always muscle it into holding a dive a bit longer. The crossfire 2 just loads up and recovers positively. I hated that thing.


I haven't flown a Katana. I was told by a few experienced pilots that it might be exactly what I was looking for. Then I noticed that the people with CP metals kept telling me to get a crossfire2. Haha.


In regards to ultra high performance, I'm assuming they meant "ultra high performance, non-cross braced". So it flies more like a cross braced wing?

The sabre2 and crossfire2 both feel responsive enough with fronts and harness, but when you give full input, it just loads up and tries to recover. They "act" like there is a lot of power waiting for you to use, but there isn't. All bark and no bite. Zippy at first, but safer because they'll load up and recover. Possibly harder to get into trouble with?
The crossfire2 recovery arc was always felt like hitting a wall. I just couldn't get more out of it. It was an unbreakable law. Once you feel it start loading up, theres no stopping it. Even snapping it around won't help it. On the other hand, you can keep the x-fire diving.

The X-fire feels quiet in the harness, but if you reef on it it'll build power and speed for A LOT longer before trying to recover. All bite and no bark. Feels like a no stress wing, care free opening, but when you want it to dive and keep diving, it will. Probably easier to find yourself in the corner. If you build more power, it'll take longer to recover... unlike the crossfire2.

Please don't share this video. I'll leave it up for a few days if anyone wants to watch.

https://vimeo.com/217050938

Most turns are full harness w/ some front pressure. I kept airspeed up so the wing was flying pretty rigid. Still pretty playful even when its trying to load up.

The 540 after opening was going to be a 270, but I decided to keep it going. You'll see the hesitation in my POV. I could barely get a crossfire2 around before it would load up, let alone with any hesitation.

The last 360 in the cloud that I depressurized for is all harness with some front right pressure. Comes around easy and would have loved to keep diving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bgrozev


You can't just ignore some of the words in the sentence:
"creating a new class of ultra high performance, non-crossbraced wings"

I have no idea if this is true or not, but the semantics are clearly different than "creating a new class of ultra high performance wings".



Crossbracing is a construction technique to have a more rigid and efficient wing, while using fewer lines to minimize drag. That's all it is. I am not ignoring words. If they claim to have made a "ultra high performance wing" the construction technique is secondary, it is just the means to get there.

I agree though that what they meant is *probably* "a high performance wing one notch below crossbraced wings". But that is not what they said. And even if they did, not all crossbraced canopies are created equal. The performance (and target) of a Peregrine has nothing to do with the performance of a Xaos 21, Sensei or Excalibur (just to give some examples). So if what they meant is "a high performance wing one notch below crossbraced wings", which crossbraced wings are they talking about? Does it perform better or worse than entry level, or old crossbraced canopies? Is it more aggressive? Paying special attention to the "non-crossbraced" aspect of it, doesn't give any useful info per se, it just "pushes" you to make assumptions, which might or might not be correct.

CloudCompanion


In regards to ultra high performance, I'm assuming they meant "ultra high performance, non-cross braced". So it flies more like a cross braced wing?



That is something that I hope it will be cleared up soonish. Because flying like a crossbraced wing can mean too many things. For instance, if it feels like a "Valkyrie lite", that's probably not a wise step in canopy progression if you come from a Sabre 2. But if it feels like a Velo with a shorter recovery arc, then it might be a good step.

The issue for me is that the description makes it look like a super aggressive canopy (and the video loading it at 2.5 seems to confirm that), but the natural place for an advanced non-crossbraced canopy seems to be significantly less aggressive than that, so I am confused.

Anyway, thanks a lot for your input, it is greatly appreciated.

EvilGenius

Got to admit that looks like a lot of fun....I've asked Icarus if they do demos! :)



Since you jump in Schaffen, I am assuming you'll be at the Flanders Boogie. If so, Sife will have Icarus canopies for demoing. I hope they'll have X-Fires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0