strop45 0 #26 May 2, 2007 The canopy has a certain vector associated with its flight, and yes wing loading generally just increases the magnitude of the vector. The wind also has a vector associated with it. If you want to know how a skydiver moves relative to a fixed object on the ground you must ADD the two vectors. Try this and you will see that a more heavily loaded canopy will make more progress upwind that a more lightly loaded one and vica-versa - a more lightly canopy will make more ground downwind than a more heavily loaded canopy.The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits." -- Albert Einstein Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,085 #27 May 2, 2007 >How do you want to compare glide if those canopies has nothing in common? It's an example of how remaining in the air longer will increase your range even if your glide ratio is awful. >I was flying a formation with a Cobalt loaded 1.6. My wing man used a > Sabre loaded <1.3. And we kept the formation for several hundred >meters.... Right - but if he wanted to out-float you he probably could. And if you were both flying back from an upwind spot, that might let him make it back even if you couldn't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenixlpr 0 #28 May 3, 2007 Quote >How do you want to compare glide if those canopies has nothing in common? It's an example of how remaining in the air longer will increase your range even if your glide ratio is awful. What was the original question? Quote Effects of wing-loading on glide angles...? So if we are interested in that we have to keep rest of the parameters near constant: wing's size, wing's trim, ....etc If we don't do this the conclusion we got wouldn't be relevant for the question in hand. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,085 #29 May 3, 2007 >What was the original question? "Effects of wing-loading on glide angles." Yep. In no wind, then changing the loading on a canopy (say by adding a weight belt) will have little effect on glide ratio. In no wind, changing the loading on a canopy by changing canopies will have a more significant effect, since a Sabre 150 at 1:1 is not the same 'aircraft' with the same L/D as a Sabre 135 at 1.1 to 1. In wind, if you are flying downwind, light wing loading is your friend. You will stay in the air longer to be pushed by the wind. In terms of vector addition, the wind vector is larger in magnitude than the glideslope vector, so the resultant is more horizontal - which means a better glide over the ground. (Relative to the air, of course, the glide angle doesn't change.) In other words, your statement "So canopy with the higher wing load covers more ground both ways" is incorrect. A canopy with a higher wing loading will generally cover LESS ground when flying downwind than a canopy with a lighter wing loading. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phoenixlpr 0 #30 May 3, 2007 Quote In no wind, changing the loading on a canopy by changing canopies will have a more significant effect, since a Sabre 150 at 1:1 is not the same 'aircraft' with the same L/D as a Sabre 135 at 1.1 to 1. I think in this case with or without the weight west is the right question. Quote In other words, your statement "So canopy with the higher wing load covers more ground both ways" is incorrect. A canopy with a higher wing loading will generally cover LESS ground when flying downwind than a canopy with a lighter wing loading. Ok. I agree if we keep on flying the the same angle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LloydDobbler 2 #31 May 3, 2007 Quote Quote In no wind, changing the loading on a canopy by changing canopies will have a more significant effect, since a Sabre 150 at 1:1 is not the same 'aircraft' with the same L/D as a Sabre 135 at 1.1 to 1. I think in this case with or without the weight west is the right question. Actually, for the record, my original question (which I would consider the "right" question) was regarding downsizing a canopy to invoke higher wing-loading. Or is that what you're saying - that the answer changes depending on whether we're talking about flying on the same canopy with weights, or downsizing to a smaller version of the same canopy to increase the W/L? If that's what you mean, I agree. That is the question. Regardless, the discussion has been darn educational, folks. I've learned a lot (which isn't difficult, at this stage in my jumping career). Thanks again for everyone's contributions. Signatures are the new black. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
