KA2 and Crossfire3

[colin2000 0]

SethInMI

***

I don't ever post hear, but this is one I felt I need to adddress because most people who speak of the xf1, usually have never flown one.

As someone who has owned and put many jumps on both the original xf1(01') and the xf2(08'), that statement is completely incorrect.

Nice to hear from a lurker! I was just paraphrasing the website, so the comparison on recovery arc is nzaero's, not mine.

I am interested in the xfire3, so if you get a chance to jump one come back here and give a review.

Seth

Yeah, if you're reading from their site, that is the original Crossfire marketing material. I dont believe they, NZAerosports, ever updated that material when they came out with the Crossfire2. They just used the same marketing material that was written for the first one. As you can see in the description, they only use the Crossfire moniker, with the occasional "2" inserted inconsistently here and there. I'd have to check some old Para Gear ads to be for certain, but it looks exactly the same as the ads put out in 99'.

In fact, Im not exactly sure how much design influence they actually had with the 2nd versions of the Crossfire or the Safire. Things got confusing when Precision stopped making Icarus branded canopies and came out with their own line of canopies back in the early 2000's. Icarus(Spain) had been producing Icarus licensed canopies, but with the advent of the SFire canopy, released in the not too distant past, Im not sure if they are even making them anymore, TBH. I haven't followed those other companies since I started flying Daedalus canopies.

I could be wrong cause I dont know for certain, but to me, it seemed like Spain made the revisions to the original design. After that it was marketed as the Crossfire2, which was then sold from both locations, NZ and Spain. This is just my interpretation of the changes; I have no facts to back that up. Maybe someone at NZ's shop can elaborate on what exactly went down with the design changes or who made them. Though it made sense to me that they didn't, seeing that the design felt like a major step backwards in terms of performance and openings. It didn't feel, fly, or open like something NZAerosports would have designed, but who knows, maybe they did. I know a lot of people enjoy the Crossfire2 and the way it flies, but I dont think many Crossfire2 owners, if any at all, have ever experienced the flight/opening characteristics of the original Crossfire. People who have, usually have the same feelings I do about the change in direction the canopy line took; Geared more towards an all around vs. a swooping canopy.

The design magic that put Icarus canopies on the map came from Jyro and the people in NZ. If you are going to buy anything Icarus, buy from NZAerosports. But I still cant recommend the Crossfire2 to someone looking to get into high performance canopy flight. IMO, even though i came from the Crossfire2, It's not geared towards that swooping transition path. Seeing that the Crossfire3 is for sure getting its design from the people who designed the original, maybe it will inherit some of those characteristics that made the original such a success in the first place. I hope/pray the Crossfire Extreme gets back to the glory days of when the Crossfire was known and recognized as a real player in the swooping world. It's such a shame to hear people talk about the Crossfire moniker being a canopy NOT geared towards high performance canopy flight. However, its understandable being that they aren't geared that way anymore, and there have been way more Crossfire2's bought and flown than Crossfire1's. Here's to the Crossfire1 with the B-line mod; Next to my Hybrid Leia, it's arguably the most enjoyable canopy that I have ever flown, Period!

[Deimian 43]

The cat is out of the bag, and this is what the NZ folks are saying:

Quote

Her dive is more aggressive and her recovery arc longer than the Crossfire 2.

[...]

An advanced trim makes the Crossfire 3's recovery arc longer than the Crossfire 2 and introduces you to a new sight picture.

It's extremely important to bear this in mind that if you are transitioning from a Safire 2 or 3, or a Crossfire 2. The recovery arc is significantly longer, so if you turn it at the same height as you are used to, you will come out low.

It will be very interesting to compare the Crossfire 3 with the Tesla from Fluid Wings. These 2 look like very serious pre-crossbraced canopies candidates.

[skow 6]

From what I understood from Tesla video, it's not a super aggressive non-cross braced canopy but rather a intermediate one i.e. for learning to, or polishing your swoops (or maybe I understood wrong), which would still put it behind e.g. Katana or Mamba

[Deimian 43]

That is my understanding too, but the crossfire 2 was a few steps behind the katana as well in terms of aggressiveness. My understanding of the situation is:

Katana-> Mega-long recovery arc, very aggressive dive, comparable to aggressive cross-braced canopies (Velocity or maybe a notch less, like a JFX?)
Crossfire 2-> Medium recovery arc, normal dive, comparable to aggressive tapered canopies (Sabre 2)
Crossfire 3-> Long recovery arc? Something between Crossfire 2 and Katana?
Tesla-> Long recovery arc? Something between Crossfire 2 and Katana?

[nad 0]

Does anybody have plans on competing with any of the new non-crossbraced wings next year in the CP circuit?

I'm not sure how the Crossfire3/Telsa will compete against the current Katana. But, I do have plans on competing in the last 2 circuits at Paraclete next year and really trying to decide on staying the the wing I have now or move over to a new planform.

[jumpsalot-2 3]

Will Crossfire 3 go to a 189 like Crossfire 2 did ? I had a CF2 189 and loved it but was only at 1.3 so I sold it. Now it can have a lighter wing load ?

Life is short ... jump often.

[jumpsalot-2 3]

Will the CF3 fly "shallower" than a Sabre 2 in full flight ?

Life is short ... jump often.

[nad 0]

Good question for the NZ folks. I've gone through the order form and didn't see the exact sizes they plan on selling. There is a 159 in production that will be a stock canopy.

[jumpsalot-2 3]

I also looked last week. It is very unspecific yet. Just a pre-order ad. It will all come.

Life is short ... jump often.

[mx19 0]

NZA will usually make a canopy in any size you want. Unless something has changed.

[skow 6]

Deimian

That is my understanding too, but the crossfire 2 was a few steps behind the katana as well in terms of aggressiveness. My understanding of the situation is:

Katana-> Mega-long recovery arc, very aggressive dive, comparable to aggressive cross-braced canopies (Velocity or maybe a notch less, like a JFX?)
Crossfire 2-> Medium recovery arc, normal dive, comparable to aggressive tapered canopies (Sabre 2)
Crossfire 3-> Long recovery arc? Something between Crossfire 2 and Katana?
Tesla-> Long recovery arc? Something between Crossfire 2 and Katana?

From info on the site: "The aspect ratio and taper have not been changed dramatically from the Crossfire 2 because it was important to us that the Crossfire 3 remains in the same class of wings, suitable for intermediate to advanced pilots."

My understanding is that both Tesla and XF3 (and XF2) are in the same class which means both are less aggressive than Katana.

[Deimian 43]

skow

From info on the site: "The aspect ratio and taper have not been changed dramatically from the Crossfire 2 because it was important to us that the Crossfire 3 remains in the same class of wings, suitable for intermediate to advanced pilots."

My understanding is that both Tesla and XF3 (and XF2) are in the same class which means both are less aggressive than Katana.

Velocity and Stiletto have both the same aspect ratio. Paragliding wings have a way higher aspect ratio than skydiving wings. Aspect ratio have little to do with the recovery arc and how steep a wing is (there might be some relation with everything else being equal, but it is not a strong indicator for small variations).

The taper itself doesn't add information on this regard either. Sabre 2 and Crossfire 2 are both comparable, with the Crossfire 2 being significantly more tapered than the Sabre 2.

These things tell you how responsive the canopy might be to input, but IMO the recovery arc outweighs twitchiness to define the aggressiveness of a canopy.

[skow 6]

Deimian

Velocity and Stiletto have both the same aspect ratio. Paragliding wings have a way higher aspect ratio than skydiving wings. Aspect ratio have little to do with the recovery arc and how steep a wing is (there might be some relation with everything else being equal, but it is not a strong indicator for small variations).

The taper itself doesn't add information on this regard either. Sabre 2 and Crossfire 2 are both comparable, with the Crossfire 2 being significantly more tapered than the Sabre 2.

Not really sure why you mention them, but I never said any of those things you wrote.

The main point was:

skow

it was important to us that the Crossfire 3 remains in the same class of wings, suitable for intermediate to advanced pilots."

based on which my understanding is that XF2 and XF3 are aimed for the pilots wanting the same class wing

[Deimian 43]

skow

Not really sure why you mention them, but I never said any of those things you wrote.

I mentioned that because of this:

skow

The aspect ratio and taper have not been changed dramatically from the Crossfire 2 [...]

You extracted your conclusion ("XF2 and XF3 are aimed for the pilots wanting the same class wing") from a comment regarding aspect ratio and taper. I just said that aspect ratio and taper aren't strong indicators about the aggressiveness of a canopy, at least when it comes to recovery arc and steepness. That quote just means that the canopy is as twitchy as the Crossfire 2, not that it is equally aggressive

[skow 6]

Deimian

I just said that aspect ratio and taper aren't strong indicators about the aggressiveness of a canopy, at least when it comes to recovery arc and steepness.

You could say also otherwise - long recovery arc and steepness aren't strong indicators about the aggressiveness of a canopy at least when it comes to twitchiness - for an extreme example (don't take this seriously) - round parachutes fly pretty damn steep but you don't see that many of them in the competitions

I know what you're saying and you are right. AR and taper are not the only factors that make an aggressive wing. But how quickly and easily canopy goes to dive (i.e. how twitchy is it) definitely adds to aggressiveness. (compare e.g. AR and the nose of VK and VE)

[Deimian 43]

Fair enough

[boardumb 0]

Anyone have a chance to jump the Crossfire and Tesla now that they are on the market?

[freeflyfree 0]

Bump.

Has anybody flown the Tesla?

--
Blue Skies
NO FEARS, NO LIMITS, NO MONEY...
"A Subitánea et Improvísa Morte, Líbera nos, Domine."

[EvilGenius 0]

Managed to put a few jumps on a Crossfire 3 - 109 last week so here are a few first impressions.

For reference my last 500 jumps have all been under Sabre 2's the last 100 under a Sabre 2 107 which I load at 1.6-1.7, I'm a million miles away from being a canopy piloting master and max turn is a 90.

Openings were great, soft on heading and not super snively

Harness input was a joy compared to my Sabre 2, the wing felt significantly more responsive yet at the same time solid and stable. Although the same size as my regular canopy it felt smaller and more agile

The flare, didn't have to think about it really but I stopped so it must be fine!

The recover arc actually seemed to be about the same as my Sabre 2 but the front riser pressure seemed higher, was a little disappointed I couldn't get it to dive more.

Only did 4 jumps so I was far from getting familiar with the wing and kept coming out high so no rear risers for the landing. Up high they elicited a nice snappy response, didn't try and see how much it would take to stall it.

Hope this was helpful, going to try out a KA and whatever else I can get my hands on this summer to see how they all stack up.

[dangerWilde 1]

This is a very interesting thread as it speaks to a range of canopies that I’m very interested in. Given the time that has passed and the new wings now on the market, I wonder if I can trigger more conversation.

We now see the PD Sabre 3, pitched in a way that seems to narrow the gap between the “predecessor” Sabre 2 and the Katana. We’ve also seen the NZA Crossfire 3 and the Icarus World XFire in circulation for a few years. Finally the Fluid Wings Gangster has become a mainstream contender in this class, and the PD Katana still popular. So five canopies, with various pedigrees, all somewhat overlapping in the performance range.

My experience with them is limited to a few dozen jumps on the Gangster & Katana and a couple of hundred on the XFire at between 1.4 - 1.6 and Sabre 2 at lower loadings (and I have a Crossfire 3 still in the bag from the factory but never even demoed), so I wouldn’t pitch my opinion as expert - or even necessarily particularly well informed, so I won’t share beyond the fact that I found the Gangster to have the most confidence inspiring range and flexibility, the XFire to be heavy on the fronts, wanting to load higher, do longer turns and have a shorter recovery arc, and the Katana to fly very nicely, light on the fronts, allow setup with more altitude thanks to the long recovery arc, but controls fall off sharply at lower speed.

I anticipate that I’ll find the Crossfire 3 to feel like a good training platform as I Continue to build experience, but imagine that sooner or later I’ll want to return to the Gangster, given its long recovery arc, impressive range on rears, powerful flare and manageable fronts, as well as perfect openings and long spot capability.

Edited July 28, 2020 by dangerWilde
Add detail to XFire experience