F-111 vs. ZP

[atsaubrey 0]

I am curious why most manufacturers seem to limit F-111 to about 1:1 wingloading, and ZP doesn't seem to have this. Is ZP really that much stronger? Or is it limited on F-111 due to its flare for landing? Doesn't ZP tend to tear more once it starts compared to F-111?

"GOT LEAD?"

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

I am curious why most manufacturers seem to limit F-111 to about 1:1 wingloading, and ZP doesn't seem to have this. Is ZP really that much stronger? Or is it limited on F-111 due to its flare for landing? Doesn't ZP tend to tear more once it starts compared to F-111?

There's little performance difference between ZP brand new F111. I think moderately loaded (1.2 - 1.6 pounds/square foot) F111 PD reserves land better than the same sized ZP Lightnings.

The problem is longevity. While a ZP canopy with in-trim lines retains its performance until it fails (after thousands of jumps when packed inside and not jumped in a dusty environment), after a few hundred jumps F111 canopies don't have the same flare (A PD reserve must be inspected for porosity after 25 uses or 40 pack jobs). With a slower parachute (< 1.0 pounds/square foot) that can still be comfortable although I wouldn't do it higher.

Would you pay $1500 for a parchute that was only good for a few hundred jumps, making your cost $5-$6 a jump instead of the $1/jump depreciation on a ZP main?