Phi Scala 2 Light — Impressions
This article started off as some quick first impressions but I’ve had so many flights on it that it grew into full review.
I’ve been flying the Phi Allegro, a C wing, in the normal and light weight for about three years. With a recent change in EN certification rules a number of new C wings in two-liner configuration have started becoming available. While I’m very happy with my current wing, I was very curious about these two liners and how they’d compare to my wing. So I jumped at the opportunity to test the Phi Scala 2 Light when a demo wing became available.
I’ve flown the S2L (Scala 2 Light) for over 50 hours across a wide range of conditions, launches and locations. From narrow slot take-offs to expansive, grassy hillsides, Manilla’s astroturfed beauties and Widgee’s exciting launch, I’ve tested this wing’s versatility in different conditions. With the Australian spring serving up spicy conditions, I’ve had some amazing flights, taking me to new destinations along routes I’ve never flown before. It’s helped me complete my largest FAI triangle yet. These experiences, from booming thermals to tricky low saves, have given me a good feeling for the wing’s character.
This article, along with its video companions, aims to offer useful insights for fellow pilots considering the S2L especially those considering an upgrade from the Phi Allegro.
Equipment
I flew size 19 which is rated from 75–95kg with my Advance Lightness 3 harness. My all up weight was almost exactly 95kg on all flights. The wing weighs less than 3.5kg and the pack volume is about the same as the Allegro. I’m not a big fan of rods and Phi seems to make efficient wings without using many of them. The rods on the leading edge are short, about the same as the Allegro but every fifth rod is longer, going about 2/3 down the cord of the wing. Most two liners have rods that span the entire chord of the wing and it’s interesting to see this optimisation and shows how every aspect of the wing has been well thought out.
While many manufacturers are using rods made out of nitinol (an alloy with shape memory which prevents kinks), rods in this wing are plastic with a larger diameter than nitinol. Despite the lack of nitinol, Phi doesn’t seem to be concerned about rods being bent out of shape and don’t recommend any special packing technique. Interestingly, nitinol rods while being resistant to kinks, have a smaller diameter and therefore there’s a sharper edge that can result in greater abrasion if dragged on the ground.
Details of fabric and line material can be found on the Phi website but interestingly, Phi doesn’t think trimming any more frequently than two years is necessary.
Only two rows of lines and very simple looking R11 risers are a bit startling at first, as if something’s missing. But in typical Phi fashion, complexity is hidden away in the simplicity of design.
All in all, this is a lightweight, no nonsense wing without unnecessary complexity.
Launching
I’m a big fan of lightweight wings. Obviously the lighter weight is a bonus for hike n fly but it also makes for very easy launches especially in light conditions. Building a wall isn’t always a good idea on some sketchy launches where putting the wing down may mean a snagged or broken line and this is where light wings really shine. Pull the wing up from a rosette and it’ll seem to levitate as it inflates.
The S2L has very easy launch characteristics. I didn’t notice any tendency to hang back, stick or overshoot. Seems just as easy to launch as my Allegro which is a super easy wing to launch. A couple of times when it came up off centre due to switching wind, it was very easy to centre.
Looking up at the wing, it has a very unique profile with fat chord in the middle and pointy tips. It doesn’t look like a wing of 6.77 aspect ratio.
In strong wind, the lack of the C riser makes it more difficult to hold the wing down. Pulling the B riser makes the wing do a sort of a b-line stall. Unfortunately, the wind continued to get stronger when I attempted to launch in strong conditions in Manilla once and I had to abort so I didn’t get a chance to see how the S2L drags you across the launch :D
Having a nice launch is super satisfying and sets the tone for the entire flight and the S2L was a joy to launch every time.
Controls
The responsiveness of the brakes and the agility of the wing was immediately obvious after the first launch. Pilots that enjoy flying Phi wings will love the Allegro’s handling. All Phi have a certain something about their controls that’s very familiar and satisfying and the S2L is no exception.
Brake travel is short and effective — the wing responds to the smallest of movements. Looking up at the wing it seems there was a deflection of the trailing edge with half a wrap but I found on later flights that I could hold my hands a bit higher to get rid of the deflection.
There was a fair bit of wind at ridge height on my first flight and I was a bit nervous about not knowing the spin point. But with some familiarity with the wing it because obvious that it’s not easy to unintentionally spin the wing. Over time I was able to crank the wing into very tight cores without worrying about spinning it.
Stability
The wing seems quite pitch stable but it does move around more than the Allegro and more active flying is required. Bites aggressively into thermals but it took about an hour of flying in spicy conditions to get used to this additional movement.
The feel of the air you’re flying though is less filtered on the S2L than the Allegro. The sharp pulls of the wing biting into lift were a bit unnerving initially but after some experience you realise the wing isn’t going to frontal and you start appreciating the extra feedback.
Compared to the Allegro Light the S2L is more cohesive. The tips of the Allegro seem to fly on their own at times. The S2L by comparison moves more as a unit.
Roll stability is quite good to the point where I’m only thinking about it while writing this.
Efficiency
My first flight on the S2L (Killarney, SEQ) had some of the spiciest conditions I‘ve flown in. Flying a hotter, unfamiliar wing, I didn’t want to get low behind the ridge in strong wind so I headed out to the flats sooner than I would have on the Allegro. Here I didn’t find lift where I was expecting and ended up quite low above a row of trees behind a paddock. This is where the wing really shone, maintaining altitude well in turbulence and carving back efficiently towards the upwind side in each turn in a thermal that was being sheared by strong wind.
Thermalling
I’ve heard the designer Hannes dismiss the ability of wings to sniff out lift but there were so many times when the S2L successfully guided me into lift that I’d have to disagree with him on this point :) When you can feel a thermal nearby but can’t locate the core, let up the brakes and feel where the wing is pulling out and go with it. It’s surprisingly how well this works sometimes.
Staying in the core of the thermal seems easier and with less weight shift on the S2L than the Allegro. Carving upwind into the thermal seems more efficient on the S2L as well. This is quite obvious when it’s windy. I feel like I can hold constant brake pressure on the S2L and keep turning in the core where as on the Allegro I’d have to extend my upwind turn a bit to cut into the thermal.
Performance Into Wind
I flew SE from Killarney towards Urbenville on my first flight in the S2L. I had a strong tailwind and the base was at 3000m that day. But we’d launched very late so I decided to fly north to Woodenbong to make retrieve easier plus how can one resist flying to a place called Woodenbong?
The last 10 or so km of this flight were directly into wind and I have no doubt that if I had been on my Allegro I would never had made it to the Bong. Whether it has an affinity for bongs or just better efficiency into wind, I don’t know, but the Scala 2 flew amazingly well into headwind, sometimes parked but incredibly not losing too much height.
On the second flight on the S2L, I was flying with two friends (one flying a Mentor 7 and the other an Alpina 4) in the convergence that sets up on the dividing range near Killarney. I didn’t have a big advantage over them as we headed downwind towards the east enjoying view of the Condamine gorge. But as soon as we encountered headwind from the easterly airmass, they were quickly left behind and low. The advantage into headwind was also obvious against another friend who joined me later on his Cure 2.
Speedbar and Rear Riser Control
Better rear riser control along with performance are the selling points of two liners. Ever since flying a Zeno and feeling how well balanced the riser controls and speed bar are, I’ve been looking forward to trying it on another wing. The S2L didn’t disappoint. The rear riser control was so light compared to the Allegro that it felt quite odd but when you get used to this difference it’s a delight to use.
The pressure on the riser controls is light enough that it feels like you can stop collapses without switching to brakes. After a couple of flights I felt comfortable enough to stay on bar all the time and use the rear risers for pitch control and slowing the wing down.
Just like the Allegro, the S2L feels more efficient on 1/3 bar when flying through turbulence near a thermal. It is solid enough on bar that you can safely stay on full or 3/4 bar right up to the point where the wing starts climbing in a thermal. The rear riser controls get progressively lighter with more bar and are light enough to be effective in pitch control in this scenario.
On some two liners, the brakes are quite long to compensate for the pitch change when bar is pushed. And because of this, pilots must take a full wrap of brakes when flying unaccelerated. On the S2L, the speedbar travel seems to be about the same as the Allegro and the brakes feel just right with a normal half wrap grip.
Collapse behaviour
After an SIV and several intentional stalls, spirals and SATs I became very comfortable with the Allegro and it’s collapse behaviour. I found it’s collapses to be quite benign. It seemed to collapse early and shed energy without any major deviations from direction of flight.
The S2L on the other hands is incredibly solid. There were several times where I expected the wing to frontal but it didn’t. I could actually see the leading edge of the wing distort from the pressure and form a crease behind the leading edge but it would just pop back out without collapsing. When the tips collapse they usually pop out with more energy than the Allegro.
Despite flying the wing in some of the strongest conditions I’ve flown, the wing always behaved well and never surprised me. The worst collapses have been a couple of small asymmetrics that didn’t result in any significant direction change.
I’ve wondered whether the crescent like shape with a fat middle and pointy ends contributes to tip collapses that don’t seem to stick too much.
Rapid Descent Techniques
Phi recommends using the B3 lines (named 3C3 in line plan) to induce ‘big ears’. Pulling the B3s effectively stalls the tips of the wing and they fold back creating a smaller lifting surface. They pop out immediately after you let go. I found pulling both ears at the same time is better because the wing starts to turn if you do it one side at a time. I only tested big ears once and is something I’d like to practice more.
When pulling B3s, be careful to pull them in a way that only pulls the line on the wing side and not the riser. I found both lines had slide down the carabiner despite the plastic stopper.
My favourite descent technical is a spiral dive but I didn’t want to stress the wing so I didn’t go full face down. But it’s obvious that the wing has more energy as it starts to spiral than the Allegro. I saw some comments online from online engineers saying that spiralling with a collapse on the outside stresses the inner structure of the wing too much. But the designer doesn’t see a problem with this manoeuvre on the Scala 2.
The manual also suggests using the rear risers to enter what sounds like a parachutal vertical stall. I was wary of getting twisted and didn’t try this.
I’m hoping to do an SIV on the S2L to get more comfortable with these techniques as well as stalls.
Dislikes
To keep the wing light, the brake handles are very simple with tiny bits of velcro to attach them to the riser. The velcro is the same colour as the riser and the brake handles which makes stowing them take longer.
The brake handles do not have swivels and while they don’t spin if you let go in flight, after a few flights I found that the brake lines had twisted to the point where the brake cascade was twisted as well.
To quickly identify “big ear” lines, it would be nice to have different colours for the 3C3 lines even if only at the base.
Flights
Almost every flight on the S2L has been special in one way or another. I’ve flown some routes and destinations I’ve never flown before. Flew till sunset several times. Flew my first 100km FAI triangle. Had the second longest flight ever (258km downwinder).
Conclusion
I think the S2L is a great wing for pilots moving up from a three liner C wing. The first hour or so in very spicy conditions was a bit overwhelming but I quickly got used to the wing and after several epic flights, I’m very comfortable on it and trust it.
The additional piloting demands easily pay off in much better performance and efficiency. The ability to stay in the air longer and push farther into headwind extended several of my flights well beyond where they’d have ended on the Allegro.
The simplicity of design, light weight, low pack volume, easy launching, super solid profile and great performance make it an excellent all rounder wing and a good first two liner for pilots with experience on C wings.
I liked the demo S2L so much I bought it :)
Updates
Speaking with a very experienced pilot who is now flying the Scala 2 (standard weight), he found that the angle of glide is optimum when flying a few kg below the top of the weight range. He found he was arriving lower after familiar valley crossings when flying at the top of the weight range.
Manual
https://phi-air.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/SCALA-2-light-MANUAL-ENG_v1.04.pdf
