Sabre 2

[Aviatrr 0]

I know that many of you have been asking questions regarding the new PD Sabre 2 canopy, and I can finally answer some of 'em with first hand info.. I was out at Deland today, and talked to Scott Miller(one of PD's canopy guru's) about the new Sabre2.. He told me he had one there, and asked if I wanted to jump it.. DAMN RIGHT I DO! Openings? All I can say is....SWEET! On the first opening, I thought I was jumping a Spectre.. It opened slow, on heading, and soft.. It seemed to me that it took longer than a Spectre to open, but it took less altitude then a Spectre at the same loading takes.. On each of the 4 jumps that I took it to terminal it opened in 500-700ft.. The longer openings were when I pushed the nose back into the pack job - but I never rolled the nose.. I suggest just letting the nose hang - don't do anything special with it.. I was told that the openings were just like I had regardless of wing loading - from .7 to 2.4.. The one subterminal opening I had on it was also very soft, but slightly off heading.. The off heading part was more than likely due to my not perfectly stable body position when I pitched.. I pitched the pilot chute less than 1 second after exiting the Otter.. The opening seemed to take forever, but only used 300ft.. This is a canopy I would be comfortable deploying on a 1,000ft emergency exit if I didn't have a CYPRES..
The canopy flew great, and at my 1.5 loading, had a good amount of speed.. While we didn't have any bad spots today, I did fly from one end of the airport to the other and back on rear risers.....and still had altitude to burn over the landing area.. Something a Spectre would not have even come close to.. I averaged about 2,000fpm descent rate on each jump - but I was not flying straight and level for more than a couple seconds at a time.. The canopy was very responsive to rear risers(with or without brakes set).. Riser pressures were not unreasonably high for a canopy of it's size/planform, but if you use risers a lot, you'll get a workout.. Front riser turns were very effective, and altitude loss was minimal.. I could complete a 360 front riser turn in less than 500ft.. For landings, I used 90 and 180 front riser turns..
I made one straight in landing on this canopy, and it was a very nice landing.. There was plenty of flare power, and I only had to take a couple steps after landing - in no wind.. On my front riser approaches, I was suprised how far this canopy surfed.. My first front riser approach - a 90 degree - the traffic pattern got kinda crowded, so I decided to land in an alternate landing area just downwind of the primary landing area - with a taxiway separating the two.. I was heading towards the experienced landing area, but expected to land in the alternate area.. After my riser turn - which built up quite a bit of speed - I proceeded to surf right past my expected landing point, across the taxiway, and about 15' into the other field.. I would guess that surf was probably 75-100ft, and I was not trying for a long surf....I just wanted to see how it landed with a bit more speed.. The landing was great - with just a couple steps of run out.. My 180 front riser turn induced a little more speed, but I misjudged the altitude and came out of the turn pretty high.. The speed had bled off before I got to the flare point.. My last two 90 front riser approaches(pattern was crowded again) were both a little low - so I had to 'stab' out of the dive, which hurt my performance.. The surf was decent, but not great.. I didn't realize how much performance I had been losing until Scott Miller pointed out exactly how much I was having to dig out.. This canopy has a fairly long recovery arc - so it doesn't pull out of a dive very fast.. People doing low front riser turns or toggle turns need to be careful.. I feel that a much better approach - safety and performance wise - would be a slow, carving 90 or 180 front riser turn, rather than the snap turns I was doing..
I think this canopy would be an excellent choice for anybody looking for a nice opening nine cell that will give you some performance at moderate wing loadings.. Lighter loadings would be ideal for novice jumpers.. I was loading it at 1.5, and I would feel totally comfortable going down a size and increasing that to 1.65 or so.. These canopies are already a hot seller - and hardly anybody has jumped it.. I was told today that demo canopies had not even been released yet(can anybody at Quincy confirm this?), but they would be in the next week..
Getting to try out new toys like this is one of the big benefits of jumping at PD's home DZ.. If anybody has any specific questions I can address, ask away..
Mike

[Viking 0]

sweet dude did you get a price quote out of the guy??
would you recomend the sabre 2 over the spectre??
Remember when Sex was safe and skydiving was Dangerous?

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

sweet dude did you get a price quote out of the guy??
would you recomend the sabre 2 over the spectre??

Square 1 is selling 'em for $1350 right now.. Well, that's for the 150 at least.. Retail is something like $1700.. I would definitely recommend the Sabre2 over the Spectre.. Of course, there will be people that say the opposite, but it's pretty much dependent on whether you prefer a 7 cell or 9 cell.. The Sabre2 glides much better than the Spectre, but the Spectre seems a bit more capable of higher speeds on approach.. Notice I said capable - not that it normally flies faster.. I would say the speeds are close to the same, but the Spectre has a much steeper descent.. If I have to sink the canopy into a very tight area, the Spectre would have the advantage.. Any other time I can think of, the Sabre2 would take the prize..
Mike

[Geoff 0]

Quote

This is a canopy I would be comfortable deploying on a 1,000ft emergency exit if I didn't have a CYPRES..

If the plane just climbs to 1000ft and then you exit, the Cypres won't function anyway - it won't arm unless you've climbed over 1500ft.
Interesting stuff about the Sabre2 - sounds exactly like a Safire! I'd be interested to hear from anyone who's jumped both.
Geoff

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

If the plane just climbs to 1000ft and then you exit, the Cypres won't function anyway - it won't arm unless you've climbed over 1500ft.

Or so the manual says.. Are you willing to risk an entanglement? What if the plane gets to 1400ft, the pilot says everybody out, and by the time you get to the door to exit your at 1,000ft?

Quote

Interesting stuff about the Sabre2 - sounds exactly like a Safire! I'd be interested to hear from anyone who's jumped both.

The Safire seems to be harder to land for most people.. I never had a problem landing the Safire at a slightly higher loading than the Sabre2 I jumped - but I did notice that the Safire took a little more work to make a nice surf.. The sweet spot on the Safire was quite a bit lower - which, to me, translates into less overall flare power.. I had to run like hell on the Safire loaded at 1.6 on a no wind day.. Both have soft openings, but the Safire ate up more altitude..
Overall, I'd say the Sabre2 and the Safire fly about the same, with the main difference being during landing.. Also, I would not deploy a Safire below 1500ft on a low exit.. I feel that the Safire lands well, but it's not as easy to land as the Sabre2....which makes a big difference for somebody with low experience..
Mike

[DZBone 0]

So, it will be interesting to get the comparison between the Sabre II and the Cobalt. I started to get a handle on the openings. The weird one was the sub-terminal hop-n-pop that snapped open into line twists (my fault, bad body position). Makes sense given the way the two-stage opening is designed. Kind of ironic, tho. A high-speed opening will actually progress slower than a very low-speed one!
Anyway dude, the canopy is in the mail. At least to Atair. I would guess you will see it soon. Ignore the blood stains (if they are still there), it wasn't jumping related.
Enjoy!

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

So, it will be interesting to get the comparison between the Sabre II and the Cobalt. I started to get a handle on the openings. The weird one was the sub-terminal hop-n-pop that snapped open into line twists (my fault, bad body position). Makes sense given the way the two-stage opening is designed. Kind of ironic, tho. A high-speed opening will actually progress slower than a very low-speed one!

I'll be sure to let ya know how I think the two compare.. The sub-terminal opening on the Sabre2 was a bit snakey, but that was due to my body position.. I pitched when I was turned about 90 to the plane, still on the hill, just as I cleared the bottom of the plane.. The opening seemed to take forever(and the video agrees), but the altitude loss was minimal..
I'm going to be jumping a buddy's Crossfire 139 the same weekend as the Cobalt, so I'll let ya know what I think about the Crossfire also..
Mike

[VivaHeadDown 0]

I've been jumping for about 3 years with 240 jumps. Most of my jumps have been to get the most from my time in the air, and from my time on the particular canopy I had. I've spent many nights in the Perfect Spot listening and talking to Scott Miller and have tried to be cautious with my progression through canopy flying. I have just begun front riser landings (usually ending up high, but that tends to be intentional untill I have a permanant canopy to really learn from) over the last 40 jumps or so.
Getting to my question. I liked my Spectre front riser attempts enough to say that when I get the money together, I'm going to get a Spectre. Do you think the Sabre2 would be a better choice? The reason I ask is because I used to borrow my friend's Triathalon and had trouble adjusting to the fact that I couldn't eat altitude no matter how hard I tried, and I was not confident enough to try a super low front riser turn onto final. Have you found the same thing with the Tri and would you compare that tendancy with the Spectre, or is it different?

[BenW 0]

Aviatrr,
Any idea when PD will be releasing some info on the Sabre2? There's nowt on the website!
Thanks for the detailed review - perhaps give it to Sangiro, so he can add it to the Gear section of the site?
Ben.

[RemiAndKaren 0]

Ben,
Grog posted in the forum some tech info and pricing he got from PD...
here's the link
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forums/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=forumtalkback&Number=29972&page=&view=&sb=&o=&vc=1#Post29972

[skybytch 273]

Viva, I haven't jumped a Tri or done front riser turns to landing with a Spectre so I can't answer most of your question.
Based on what I've learned at work I'd suggest putting some demo jumps on a Sabre2 before you buy anything. I haven't jumped one yet, but knowing how cool the Spectre is and knowing that PD considers the Sabre2 to be everything a Spectre is but with nine cells, I think you'll like it!
Ben - there's Sabre2 info up in Square One's online catalog now - http://www.square1.com/Catalog/catalog.html.
pull and flare,
lisa
----
I am a nobody.
Nobody's perfect.
Therefore, I am perfect!

[AirMan 0]

Wow, that sounds awesome. All I know is that I've been on PDs waiting list for the Sabre2 for some time now, and Kolla emailed me yesterday and said the wait wouldn't be much longer. I am on the lists for either a 150 or a 170, whichever is available first. Not too long ago I had demoed a Sabre170 and experienced one of those notorious Sabre "hard-openings"...and Wow did it ever ring my bell, haha. All I've been hearing is that the new Sabre2 won't have any of those inherent problems. (Although, the problem can also be pack-job much of the time). But, I am so excited about jumping this thing. I'm also looking forward to jumping a Cobalt one of these days. "Air-Man"

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

Getting to my question. I liked my Spectre front riser attempts enough to say that when I get the money together, I'm going to get a Spectre. Do you think the Sabre2 would be a better choice?

I have about 50 jumps or so on a Spectre loaded at almost 1.5 - the same as I loaded the Sabre2.. I only have 3 or 4 jumps on the Spectre that were NOT front riser approaches.. The Spectre dives quite a bit in front riser snap hooks - a bit less in carves - and loses a lot of altitude.. I felt that the Sabre2 used a lot less altitude for the same maneuver.. The Sabre2 has a fairly long recovery arc(allowing you to stop the riser input earlier), but not quite as long as the Spectre in my experience.. The downside is that the long recovery arc means it takes a while to get back to straight and level - so doing a low turn can really bite ya hard.. On the Spectre, I would do 180 snap hooks(just fast, aggressive front riser turns) and burn about 500ft.. On the Sabre2, I didn't even burn 500ft on a 270 snap! I can't say anything about the Triathalon - I haven't done aggressive approaches on them, nor have I jumped one at roughly the same loading.. I definitely recommend the Sabre2 over the Spectre - and I have had a couple people from PD tell me they feel the same, but can't say so publicly..
Remember, the Spectre is a 7 cell and the Sabre2 is a 9 cell.. Traditionally, 7 cells have a much steeper glide - meaning you will cover less ground, and descend faster, than a 9 cell.. Trying to make it back from a long spot? You want a 9 cell.. Like to make steep, accuracy type landings? You want a 7 cell.. The glide angle also comes into play during front riser turns.. Since the Spectre is already sinking faster than the Sabre2, when you take that canopy on a more vertical plane(as you are when you haul down on a front riser), it will descend faster.. They both complete the turns in about the same distance over the ground, but the Spectre will burn a lot more altitude.. If I understand what you're referring to on the Tri, you will probably have the same "problem" on the Sabre2 initially.. I was doing the turns too low on the Sabre2(I was having to 'stab out' of the dive) - but on the Spectre, I did them just about right.. I don't know why - probably just because I knew the Spectre needed a lot more altitude to recover, so I gave myself much more of a margin for error..
I strongly suggest you heed any advice you get from Scott.. Both him and John Le Blanc are highly experienced canopy pilots(and test pilots) and know what they are talking about.. I take their advice very seriously.. I am very cautious with my low altitude maneuvers, and I'm not at all afraid to bail out of an attempt that doesn't look good and make a crosswind or downwind landing.. If there is any doubt as to whether or not I will finish the turn in the altitude I have, or if traffic becomes a factor, I come off the front risers immediately.. What I do then will depend on the situation - but if it's an altitude issue, usually a toggle flat turn(or even better, a 'flat' rear riser turn if you are proficient at them) does the trick and puts me into the wind.. If not, crosswind landing here I come.. Don't be afraid to look stupid.....you'll look really stupid if you hook in under a good canopy..
Mike

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

Any idea when PD will be releasing some info on the Sabre2? There's nowt on the website!

I have no idea.. I didn't see any brochures or anything at PD for the Sabre2, either.. They're already selling like crazy, and hardly anybody has ever jumped the canopy.. I wouldn't have bought a brand new type of canopy to the market without jumping one - but now that I've jumped it, I wouldn't think twice about buying one.. I think it's an awesome canopy that will have plenty of performance for most people for their first several hundred jumps..

Quote

Thanks for the detailed review - perhaps give it to Sangiro, so he can add it to the Gear section of the site?

Good idea, I'll e-mail it to him so he can create a 'Sabre2' category and post it..
Mike

[BenW 0]

Remi, Lisa & Mike,
Thanks for the info and input! Appreciated. It sure looks like a good option for me, once I get tired of my Sabre(1) 170!
B.

[GrumpySmurf 0]

End cell closures - it's proving to be a fact of life with this canopy (though I am only jumping it at a 1.2 - recently 'A'd ya know) - this might be affecting it, and all the other people I know who are jumping them are students with about the same or lighter loadings and several have witnessed the same thing (SDC recently switched from Safires to Sabre 2's for their student canopys).

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

End cell closures - it's proving to be a fact of life with this canopy (though I am only jumping it at a 1.2 - recently 'A'd ya know) - this might be affecting it, and all the other people I know who are jumping them are students with about the same or lighter loadings and several have witnessed the same thing (SDC recently switched from Safires to Sabre 2's for their student canopys).

In my 5 jumps on the Sabre2(loaded about 1.5), I never had end cell closure.. Standard PRO-pack, nothing special with the nose.. It was a brand new canopy with only 20 jumps on it.. I think it was about 5 or 6 days old when I jumped it.. Maybe they solved an early end cell problem..
Mike