Descriptive WL

[format 1]

I saw a friend breaking wrist by landing an old 120sqft, WL 1.89 - With a newer canopy, same size, less blown (!) he is safe!
I used to fly old canopies with WL 0.9:1 and comparing to those I consider myself safer now on newer fabric with WL 1.3:1
I'm saying couple of things:
- don't be afraid of higher wingloading under better fabric
- you don't need to say your WL is 1.5:1, it's allways :1 so it's enough to say WL 1.5
- I'm suggesting that maybe we should include canopy condition with a color mark
Example: I used to be less safe with WL 0.9 Red then now with WL 1.3 White.

Fabric condition may/does influence performance.
Maybe riggers can qualify it with a color

I can elaborate more but I preffere you do

What goes around, comes later.

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

I saw a friend breaking wrist by landing an old 120sqft, WL 1.89 - With a newer canopy, same size, less blown (!) he is safe!

That's interesting. I think that's still a piloting problem.

Before you reinvent the wheel how about reading other's WNE chats? WL itself does not describe how a canopy flies is that safe or not.

Downsizing Recommendations by Brian Germain

Think about the WL of a Cessna 172, Airbus 321 and a F-16. Which one is safe?

Manufacturers' publishing WL charts by canopies already.

I'm wondering how can you improve something if you can't barely understand?

[format 1]

Quote

Think about the WL of a Cessna 172, Airbus 321 and a F-16. Which one is safe?

Yes but think about two of a kind, say Cessna 172, the older one has Some porosity in wings. It seems to me that newer wings fly safer
Can we call it then equal WL?

What goes around, comes later.

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

Yes but think about two of a kind, say Cessna 172, the older one has Some porosity in wings. It seems to me that newer wings fly safer Wink
Can we call it then equal WL?

Sure. WL is defined as wing area / suspended weight.
AFAIK wings of airplanes do not change porosity.

A ZP canopy can have its porosity for even 2000 jumps....

[format 1]

So, planes are out of topic 'cause of their stady zporosity, I agree.
Tell me the same about ZP canopies - I'll give up.

Don't you preffere Cobalt 135 ft² better when it's new instead of 1000 jumps old? I do! Why is that?

When somebody tells me his WL I'd like to know the condition of his canopy, so I could build reacher picture of a jumper.

That's where I'm going with this.

What goes around, comes later.

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

Don't you preffere Cobalt 135 ft² better when it's new instead of 1000 jumps old? I do! Why is that?

First of all it has some economical impact. A canopy with 1000 jumps is hard to re-sell on a decent price. IMHO its the best to buy a canopy with 150-300 jumps. Just compare prices with new and wear should not be significant and you might have a chance to take some money out when you don't need it anymore.

See? It has nothing to do with WL.

I've bought a Triathlon with ~600 jump. I have not jumped yet, its winter here. I jumped some old Navigators with unknown number of jumps.

Its not just about the number of jumps. Place where you jump, land, pack does matter.

WL does not tell too much. Canopy size does matter, my friend.

[peek 21]

Quote

I saw a friend breaking wrist by landing an old 120sqft, WL 1.89 - With a newer canopy, same size, less blown (!) he is safe!

Fabric condition may/does influence performance.

I agree that fabric condition will influence performance, but it is still just one part of the performance.

I'm sorry your friend broke his wrist, but a proper Parachute Landing Fall does not allow a broken wrist.

[davelepka 4]

I don't know what you're looking for here, but you are wrong.

The number of jumps on a canopy does not effect what WL you should be jumpiung at.

I have personally put 1000's of jumps on a Stiletto 107, and there is no noticable decline in performance with age.

It is possible that the lines were out of trim, or the steering lines were set up incorrectly, and this will result in a loss of performance, but that is a maintanence issue, not related to the age of the fabric.

Your skills are what counts when you choose a canoyp and a WL, the age of the canooy has nothing to do with it (provided the canopy is airworthy).

[deadbug 0]

Provided the canopy is made of ZP fabric and has been stored and cared for properly, there will be very little if any decrease in porosity with jump numbers. F-111 canopies do loose porosity with jump numbers, but thats not what were talking about here.

Doug

[yoink 321]

Good point! I think you'll be much safer on a new katana at 1.3, than an older Sabre at the same loading...

Sorry, wasn't that what you wanted to hear?

[format 1]

Quote

It is possible that the lines were out of trim, or the steering lines were set up incorrectly, and this will result in a loss of performance, but that is a maintanence issue, not related to the age of the fabric.

This I can't know/deny.

My wrist friend and I call it "blown out ZP" and is nothing new to us. Two years ago he drove blown out Fandango 120, which is (not was) flareless no matter what.

In your posts there's a word "provided that this or that" several times. Whether years or jumps or bad maintenance made it lost intended performance. How do I know why? I thought it must be fabric.


From my experience Turbo ZX205 (800 jumps used) that I flew before, is having considerable less flaring capabilities then current ZX185, which is newer (300 jumps used)

:) I still preffere less jumped canopy, I can jump Saphire2 20 jumps old WL1.55
but I can NOT jump Turbo ZX185 1000 jumps old WL 1.3
No way


You all agree that current use of WL doesn't say enough, the time will bring some news to it (I beleive)

Quote

Sorry, wasn't that what you wanted to hear?

I just wanted for all of us to add on WL - canopy jump age, at the time it seemed reasonable

by Jump number - You're old&wise, me so young

Thanks to all for your time!

Sunset skies

What goes around, comes later.

[billvon 3,107]

OK, we're talking about several different things here.

One is canopy fabric degradation. Those of us from the F111 days knew what a big problem this was; a canopy with 1000 jumps was almost unlandable unless it was big, and even big canopies lost their flare. Newer ZP fabrics are better but are NOT perfect. They lose their zero-Pness depending on where they are packed, what color the fabric is, how they are treated and where in the canopy the fabric is (top center cell is worst.) PD did a study a while back and determined that some very old ZP canopies had porosities similar to F111. (I can't find the data here, but a search of rec.skydiving might turn it up.)

So you can't jump your canopy forever and expect it to land the same. Most ZP canopies will make it to 1000 jumps without too much trouble; few will make it past 2000 without noticeable changes.

Second is line shrinkage. Spectra lines shrink with time, and this is the #1 reason that canopies get hard to land. Fortunately line kits are readily available.

Third is whether an in-trim canopy is 'safer.' For a competent pilot, yes. For someone who does a panic turn at 50 feet, no. This would tell you that it's a good idea to keep your canopy in trim. But the idea that a jumper on an old Sabre 150 can jump a new Sabre 135 and be safer overall doesn't fly (no pun intended.)

[MagicGuy 0]

To me, it sounds like you are talking about how much more flare your smaller Turbo ZX has compared to the bigger one. You are getting more flare because you are coming in faster. Speed = lift. The faster you go, the more flaring power you are going to have. I highly doubt what you are talking about has anything to do with the condition of the fabric. The lines, possibly, but I don't think it's the fabric.

[jakee 1,593]

Quote

:) I still preffere less jumped canopy, I can jump Saphire2 20 jumps old WL1.55
but I can NOT jump Turbo ZX185 1000 jumps old WL 1.3
No way

Yeah, but you're comparing apples to horses. You've got differently size, differently loaded and different design canopies and you think you only prefer one over the other because of the age of the fabric? Hmmm.

For reference, I can fly my 1,500 jumps Sabre1 to a no step landing in nil wind quite easily.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Orange1 0]

Quote

They lose their zero-Pness depending on where they are packed, what color the fabric is, how they are treated and where in the canopy the fabric is (top center cell is worst.)

Ok this is interesting , I hadn't heard that before. Can you give a bit more detail? (Darker colours worse?)

Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

[billvon 3,107]

>an you give a bit more detail?

Not too much. Aerodyne had a blue that was a problem, but in general darker colors are better at UV resistance. PD had a ZP silver that was also pretty bad; they discontinued it.

Here's a table from G+R:

Best: Purple, Dark Green, Red, Dark Blue, White
Middle: Yellow, Violet (Light Purple), Turquoise
Worst: Orange, Fluorescent Green, Fluorescent Pink, Fluorescent Yellow

I don't know how much work they did to arrive at that though. It would be great to get some better info from PD on this.

[yamtx73 0]

Quote

Quote

They lose their zero-Pness depending on where they are packed, what color the fabric is, how they are treated and where in the canopy the fabric is (top center cell is worst.)

Ok this is interesting , I hadn't heard that before. Can you give a bit more detail? (Darker colours worse?)

I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure I read in these forums that it's the brighter colors that are more affected by the UV....

The only naturals in this sport shit thru feathers...

[AndyMan 7]

I think blaming an old canopy for a poor landing is a weak excuse. In reality, what your friend did was just a simple bad landing. A good PLF would have allowed him to walk away from it uninjured, something that he should have known.
I've jumped plenty of old gear, some at very high wingloadings and have not observed such a big change over time. Newer ZP fabric is very good at retaining porosity over time. Canopies become unpopular long before they become unlandable.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[format 1]

Of course you're right.

Perhaps you can declare yourself with an opinion wether riggers should log or log not Canopy Condition?
So we could benefit out from it?

What goes around, comes later.

[popsjumper 2]

100 jumps
Student status
Arguing with the old-timers

FWIW. Your proposal is non-sensical. Give it up.
W/L is just a number. A ratio. It has nothing to do with age, porosity or performance degradation.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[jakee 1,593]

Quote

Can't you read?
There was a proposal which all of you should ignoledge or deny:
Oh please say you agree with WL extra info, like for an example: I'm jumping WL 1.3-300 jumps old canopy.
or you don't think it's necessairly.
Yes, we're learning but please follow the topic or save our time, please.

Andy was on topic, he listed the reasons he thinks your proposal is useless. You're only getting shirty because it wasn't the answer you wanted to hear.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[format 1]

Quote

100 jumps
Student status
Arguing with the old-timers

It would be a priviledge for me to teach something a "1 jump" jumper.

Oh please do it to me, with sugar on top!
I'm not afraid to learn

What goes around, comes later.

[davelepka 4]

This dude tried to peddle the same line of shit over in the swooping forum.

The thread was locked in short order.

That's a hint to anyone who can lock stuff.....

[format 1]

Quote

This dude tried to peddle the same line of shit over in the swooping forum.

The thread was locked in short order.

That's a hint to anyone who can lock stuff.....

This dude could say something like "I think we don't need riggers to qualify our canopies"
Do we?
You wanna help? Of course I thought "Swooping and Canopy control is the place I might get some answers but wherever I was hoping to avoid obstacles like you, unfriendly fellow jumper

What goes around, comes later.

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

Perhaps you can declare yourself with an opinion wether riggers should log or log not Canopy Condition?
So we could benefit out from it?

On your own main? There's no need. As a jumper you'll know far more about the state of your canopy than a rigger will.

If you're buying a used main, I suggest asking a rigger to inspect it before you buy it. His advice will be valuable.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.