FX at 1.8-1.9 anyone

[ramon 0]

Anyone fly an FX at the lower end of Icarus recommendation for cross bracing benefit (1.8)?
What was it like compared to a non-cross braced at 1.8?
thanks
ramon

[Zennie 0]

What, you planning on buying one of Derek's old mains?
Weren't you flying a Cobalt there for a while?
------------
Blue Skies!
Zennie
Edited by Zennie on 5/23/01 02:51 PM.

[SkymonkeyONE 4]

I think you are wasting your time if you jump ANY tri-brace at less than about 2.2. I load my Cobalt at 2.4 and it flies like a bat out of hell. I was loading my VX-74 at about the same wingload and I was told I was barely in the performance "sweet spot". Oh well, I like my Cobalts better anyway as all-around performance mains. I am not saying that just because I have a ride with them; remember, I jumped a VX first. If you are looking at a killer deal on a tri-brace, make sure you are at least going to get some benefit out of it. You will NOT at 1.8.
Chuck

[ramon 0]

That is the consensus opinion of the VX, but I am specifically talking about an FX (less efficient)loaded at the upper limit of a traditional canopy. .ala..119-115 size. JC Coclasure can surf the living hell out of a large FX (he has a 134 and a 114).
What I'm wondering, is If I can fly a canopy at 1.8-1.9 and I don't want to exceed that wingloading, How will an FX perform diving and straight in landings compared to a non cross braced at that wingloading
Info:
Team Extreme stats
Luigi Cani perferred wingloading 2.7 (he has 4 VXs)
Jim Slaton prefferred wingloading 2.3-2.4 (4 VXs)
OK
JC Coclasure preffered wingloading VX 2.2-2.5
But for FX 1.9-2.0
Clint Clawson preffered wingloading VX 2.2
FX 1.9
thanks
ramon

[ramon 0]

Hey Dude,
I have a Space/Alpha at about 1.5 and it is great, I'm just thinking ahead.
Derek's mains are too small ha ha. His old 70 changed hands a couple of times.
Super dave offered to let me jump his 84, but I'm not interested in that wingloading (ha 2.4).
I'll probably wind up buying an old Alpha, but there are a few larger old FXs out there.
?? who knows.
R

[SkymonkeyONE 4]

Ramon,
I didn't mean to imply that you couldn't get great surfs out of a tri-brace at that wingload; just that you couldn't get the optimum out of it. I can surf the PISS out of my dads Sabre 210 (I could also probably land it as a tandem main!), but I am not sure that is what I would buy if I found one for cheap, if you know what I mean.
As for your desire to buy a used, larger FX and grow into it; I think that is fine. They land just fine straight-in and are, obviously, less radical at lower wingloads. At less than "optimal" wingloads for max performance, though, they will only surf you as far as a similar sized "conventional" eliptical. Kind of like the Jap bike analogy: you can ride a Ninja on a dirt road, but WHY would you pay that kind of money when you could have bought an old enduro which is far better suited to that terrain?
Still, if I found an FX for $700 I would snatch it right up. I am sure I would find a good use for it.
Chuck

[ramon 0]

Thanks
Guess I can always demo. I want to be able to hook on to final much higher and maintain the dive in double fronts so that I can bail or maintain the dive (no likey low hooks). For instance I can do that on my Space much better than a similarly sized stilleto (riser pressure). Maybe the FX won't be that different until higher loadings but I want to be able to land normally on a par 3 golf hole surrounded by trees.
Bloo skies
ramon

[alan 1]

Ramon,
I have quite a few jumps on both the VX and FX. The Team EXTreme stats that you posted are very close to my preferences. VX 2.4 and FX 1.8
The FX at 1.8 will out fly any non-cross braced canopy at the same loading. One thing to remember is pilot skill. A great pilot who is dialed in on a Stiletto at 1.8 could out surf an average pilot on an FX at 1.8 who is not dialed in.

As far as front riser dives, the FX is very heavy on the front risers and will fly out of the dive, but it does have a very long recovery arc though.
alan