PowerPack Review and Pocket Rocket Back to Back Comparison

PW: Power Pack 3.6 / Pocket Rocket 3.6
Gear: 85L x 5'10 x 18" board, Armstrong MA890/130 Surf tail
Rider: ~80kg, 2nd season parawinging, riding Flow then PR, ~10 years general foiling
Style: mostly downwind, and up and downs
Conditions: variable wind: as low as 8 gusting 13kt / high as 21 gusting 26kt (4:15PM to 6:45PM), ~2-3 ft wind swell
No brand affiliations, I pay retail. PP on demo from Action Sports WA.

Out at Pinnaroo for a solid couple of hours in some pretty variable wind so got to put the PP through its paces in both overpowered, underpowered and goldilocks conditions in a very short space of time! Fire away with any questions I haven't answered.

Bottom line up front - the Power Pack an excellent parawing and it is very hard to fault. That said, it's not a Pocket Rocket killer. Here's the lowdown:

Stashing - Is pretty much faultless. The front line high split is a cinch, one grab and down it goes, every time. First time I did it in light winds I ended up with the parawing wrapped around my head as it just fell out of the sky when I grabbed it with the usual level of pull I would use for the PR. In strong winds, it is equally easy - you don't need to force the lines together like the PR, and it doesn't spin around like the PR will if you go the centre two line grab. The slightly thicker lines are much nicer to handle and less prone to a tangle as you are packing up. [PP wins]

Relaunch - far more consistent with the PR, the catching of the last rib doesn't happen. Out of 30 or so relaunches on foil I had one fail, where the A-lines wrapped around the B line centre knot and required a sit-down and untangle. The bar is less inclined to catch the A or C lines and is a nice size. [PP wins]

Riding - Exceptionally stable - if you have seen the promo videos of hooked in no-handed rides, this is not pro-level whitewashing, you can quite comfortably do this even in gusty, messy conditions. Hooked in, the ride upwind is comfortable and the wing sits there with rock-solid stability. Riding unhooked feels lighter on the bar, and the stall and dropping into the power zone is easy and controlled. The upwind capability is lacking as you have probably read/seen elsewhere. The conditions were so variable that it was difficult to get some solid long back-to-back runs to measure this, but eyeballing off Little Island there is at least 3-5 degrees difference. Again, I don't have the measurements to back this up, but it also feels slower - the more aggressive scallop at the back end feels like it is not as quick. Hopping back on the PR it is a joy powering upwind and feels faster. The PR is moving about more but just feels better. Think the difference between a high-aspect foil and a low-aspect foil, its not necessarily a bad thing, but there are sacrifices to increased stability. [PR wins]

Get Up - as per the literature, there is 'low-end grunt', but the slightly higher structural stability on the PR makes the pump up easier on the PR for me. I combine a pump up with a fairly aggressive wank of the wing which gets me up in fairly light conditions (see wind chart, rode this whole time). That didn't work as well on the PP. To be fair, first time on it so some technique changes may improve this, but I definitely could get up on the PR at a lower point. [PR wins]

Which one do you need?
So the $1700 question. should you get a Power Pack? Well, the short answers. if you already have a Pocket Rocket - probably not. If you're buying a new parawing - maybe.

Ultimately, the PP is a great downwinding parawing - but that brings us to the quandary of the sport - you don't really use a parawing when you downwind! You get up on foil and pack it away and hopefully don't pull it out again. So if you're only doing it once, do you need a really easy stash? And do you need to be able to relaunch on foil? Personally, in a downwinder my PW will be in use for under 5 minutes in a 1-hour session.

If downwinding is the only thing you do, then the PP is the no-brainer choice. But. if you don't have the time and resources to always be downwinding, the up and down session is the great joy of the sport. And for this, optimising for upwind performance is going to maximise your time riding. The PR remains my choice for an all-round parawing - it points higher and feels nicer riding upwind.

Choose the PP:
-If you primarily, or only downwind
-Speed of stashing and deploying on foil is important to you (eg wave-riding at a break)
-In larger sizes (I haven't tested though), or if your reach is shorter

(Caveat - I have a long arm span and my daily driver downwinding is the 3m, so the stash on that size doesn't bother me too much. In the larger sizes or if you have shorter arms, the PP may be a better option.)

General questions:
Can I learn on it? Can't see why not. I didn't see anything that would be an issue compared with the PR and the lines are a bit easier to manage.
Should I sell my PR's and buy PP's? No, unless one of the things above was going to make you change parawings anyway, there is nothing that will change your life.

Ultimately, both of these are sensational parawings, so don't overthink it - whichever way you're leaning in the Ozone space, you won't regret either of them (or a combination).

As a final aside, the new bag is great - I used that to put the parawing I wasn't using in while on the water, and forgot it was there.


Reference wind conditions (1615h-184h5)

CH3MTR4IL5 what a great detailed review.

You found the exact same negatives as I witnessed. Less pump for light wind get up, less up wind and slower.
I like that you noticed the pump up in light wind of the PR as too many reviews of the frigate have mistaken the static pull and bar pressure of the frigate for good light wind get up results.

I hope the PR v2 doesn't give up that light wind pump up as the way it holds its form as you pump it back in the window and then it accelerates forward with a lovely power spike, that if you can catch it with the bar, it ensures your success in getting off the water is locked in. I haven't witnessed any other brands with that possible bottom end that comes from familiarity with the PR. This is where i think Gav got it wrong.

I was out at Pinnaroo with Jack at exactly the same time.

One thing that may not be clear from his excellent review, but was noticeable to me, was the wind range of the 3.6. The graph shows how variable the wind was and he seemed to manage the 3.6 well from 12 knots all the way up to 25. That's impressive. He always looked comfortable.

Of course, pilot skill is a major component in that. Nevertheless when compared to my experience at the same time, I switched back and forth between a 3 and 4m2 parawing. I'm a year behind Jack in the skills department though.

Ozone (correctly) positions the PP as suitable for sailors with experience. I can see how this wing amplifies the existing abilities of an experienced user.

Also, Ozone's recommended wind range for the PP and is remarkably wide across all the sizes. This may be underplayed in their positioning and marketing of the PP.
Based on what I saw, in the hands of an experienced sailor, the PP could be a one wing solution, eg the 3.6
from 12 - 25 knots. I find that very attractive and something to aspire to as I improve.


For now, my lesson from yesterday is to start taking two wings out with me more often. I initially thought that was a crazy concept, but can see the utility in the approach.

True Arthur, and I didn't feel that the PP was overpowered at any point, I think it would push well into the 30kt mark. It would be good to compare overpowered as I suspect that the PP would be a lot more comfortable at the very top of the range compared with the PR which can get uncomfortable in bullets, and might be easier to control power when getting going in extreme conditions.

I don't think the PR has significantly less range though, and the 3.6 is definitely an awesome allrounder size in either model if you are only going to have a single parawing.

@WingmanWA - its really mining for tenths of points between the two, they are both great but I wouldn't take a bath on selling your PR's to replace with a PP though. As @Stormus touches on, the dream will be the next-gen best of both worlds, the mid-point between the two would be my perfect PW - a smidge less stability in exchange for speed and pointing, split the difference in the line lengths, and retain the rest of the characteristics of the PP and you'd have an all-rounder amazing machine with very little compromise.

@Anyboard/@eppo totally agree on the pump of the PR, one thing I noticed was if I am struggling with the PR I can bear off a long way (almost downwind) to get a bit of swell for a pop-up, and still retain power from the parawing, and then pump back through to 45 degrees off the wind and get going. This lets me ride the 3m in really light conditions (not whitecapping), if there is swell. If I tried this technique with the PP it didn't have the rebound from the parawing to power back up in time with my pump.

@eppo I am loving the MA's, the 790 rocks for downwinding and the 890 if its smaller, the 890/170 on a wave is the best balanced foil I've ever ridden, the only time I fall off is when the rail catches, it feels like actual surfing. Think I'm going to say farewell to the HA's (reference other thread about too many foils).

Great advice above and i concur with the start up observations both as the basic technique and also the difference i found between the PR and the other lower aspect paras ive tried - one of them very low aspect the other more mid aspect. Of course bridles, weight and overall design comes into play . and of course experience with each wing. Hence why i'm not naming brands nor knocking them - too many factors involved.

But there is no doubt you can point further DW and pump the para through that 45 window you talked about. And infact you can repeat this movement a few times quickly which helps not only build board speed but gives you time to get your feet / body pumping correctly. Once i understood this then things got much easier.

Im still waiting for my ML75 (hopefully soon) which from riding this and the 65Ml in the past lends itself even more to the technique received above. The board i'm on now is a pretty decent para board shape, very stable, volume in the nose, Sqaured short tail, parallel rails and simple flat bottom - but it has drag until it doesn't if you know what i mean. If you mis time this deep in the window to 45 spike you will fall back from the swell line coming through and the board speed stops. Found the ML whilst lacking some good features of a para board does move and release earlier and allows you to apply that technique mentioned above to a greater extent. I predict a para board somewhere in between these boards will be ideal in the future.

Chem - I have some Mas on the way - JL it's all he uses now and he's ripping. We got inspired doing a secrets run with oskar and aiden (and watching guy at the flow thingy) . so weird how what foil type you want is shifting because of this para thing. As long term armie riders we were complaining for a long time for some higher aspect sup foil paddle wings with more glide and speed . then we started parawinging . and in the end the inherent turning ability of the armie wings are a massive bonus now! Who would have thought


Great to know the start is easier . you are right the HAs which i use do require some board / water over the them and you need to keep it all going a bit before you commit to angling upwind and riding off. But i do love the 780Ha be hard to give it up . probably in weaker less powerful conditions it will have its place.


Thanks for the tips hey!

That calculation assumes that both parawings produce the same speed on the same foil, which I don't think is true. Your speed is not determined solely by the foil.

As your opening statement says, VMG is a
combination of speed and upwind angle, and my assertion is that at its maximum upwind angle, the PP is both pointing lower than the PR and is producing less speed.

I was really looking at this comment when I made mine:

"Again, I don't have the measurements to back this up, but it also feels slower - the more aggressive scallop at the back end feels like it is not as quick. Hopping back on the PR it is a joy powering upwind and feels faster." - CH3MTR4IL5

So, I'm thinking lower angles and traveling at slower speeds. Not same speed at different angles. Lower angles for me also equates to more jibes which can really add up in a river:


That's why I tend to rely on simple lap checks. When I'm riding and really trying to collect data I hit the lap reset button when I reach the end of my run, go upwind, then hit it again for the ride down and I compare the two times, aiming for 1:1.

FranP, other than rider skill being a relevant factor in vmg, I don't agree with anything you are saying.

The density of the fluid is only one parameter in the drag equation and does not automatically mean drag in the higher desnity medium is higher. John Shuttleworth showed, back in the 90s, the air drag for a very sleek catamaran sailing upwind was substantially higher than the water drag. A foiling vehicle, such as our boards, will relatively reduce the water drag substantially compared to the best displacement hull possible.

Your own 7.3% calculation completely ignores your assertion that both speed and angle matter, accounting only for angle.

You've completely ignored the input here from people who have actually ridden both the the PR sail higher and faster, contradicting them to make an apparently theoretically based assertion that the PR must sail slower because it is sailing higher.

The AI barf of a calculation is of very limited value, these tools are not remotely reliable for such kinds of calculations at this point. Correctly including the speed component of vmg in the calculation and you can easily end up with a 15 or 20% improvement in vmg. Or a whole extra lap for a typical 2km upwind/downwind run during a 2.5hr session. Hardly insignificant.

I have owned a 3.6PR since its release and recently demoed the 3.6PP and while I agree with most of the comments in the original posters excellent review i will add a couple of points.

I tested back to back ( several switches) in 17- 20 knots with some big lulls using a 90L mid length ( I weigh 85KG). First the PP felt way for powerful on the beach but this didn't translate on the water. I could get up easily on my PR and instantly fly upwind but struggled on the PP. The PP sits so far back it pulled sideways not forwards generating speed I ended up losing way more ground downwind in the starts with multiple non starts that I know I would have got up on my PR.

I feel the upwind angles of the PR at least 5deg better than the PP. This might be more over a long leg with typical lulls where you can still edge the PR and maintain a good angle but the PP tends to want to sit back in lulls dragging you onto a beam reach. It's night and day actually at the low end I feel.

When you factor in the ease of tacking the PR this further increases the benefit of the PR upwind. The PP with its shorter lines and canopy sitting back made it so much harder the chance of falling makes you think I'll gybe instead.

During testing the wind died with both wings to around 12 knots and I had to taxi back. On the PR I managed to get back to my launch point but had a walk of shame with the PP which just pulls you sideways/downwind underpowered. ( I think Ozone marketing is right to say PR better for beginners who spend allot of time taxi)

I also had some weird tangles due to my poor packaway with the PP which involved multiple bar passes which were hard to figure out something to do with the bridge line I think.

Overall I came away underwhelmed although I would like to try the PP again in solid wind and waves where the ease of pack down it what I'm looking for but for now I wouldn't trade the upwind performance of the PR.

Question for those using the PP:

Is everyone collapsing using the newly bundled center A lines? Or is anyone still grabbing all A lines?