PD Low Bulk Reserve - upsize your reserve or downsize your container?

[MB38 0]

I figured that question would come up. I'm perfectly comfortable with the 150/143 and I feel that I could land it in any conditions. Downwind on a windy day after a cutaway? Yeah, I'm comfortable with it. I would not have made this canopy/container choice if I had any doubt in my mind.

That said, why would I turn down more fabric in the same container?

I really don't know what I'm talking about.

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

I had heard a rumor of the fabric in the 'low-bulk' reserves "stretching" after ten or so openings. Anyone else heard of this?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Who cares????
No one expects a reserve to last forever.
If you make ten jumps on the same reserve, you have some other major problems ... i.e. firing your packer.
Besides, many reserve manufacturers (i.e. Strong Enterprises) recommend retiring them after 20 jumps.

[NelKel 0]

What is it (low bulk) like 20 threads per inch instead of 30.

I'd like a bigger reserve for safety reasons like everyone else, but I think I'm going to wait a bit and let others be the "test pilots".
Not trying to say PD's reserves aren't good stuff, or that they would release to the market something less than perfect. I just saying that with all new gear there are usually a few bugs/ or unforeseen problems that need to be worked out.

_________________________________________

Someone dies, someone says how stupid, someone says it was avoidable, someone says how to avoid it, someone calls them an idiot, someone proposes rule chan

[Pulse 0]

I agree to an extent, but it's not something to be ignored. No canopy lasts forever but it would be nice to have for as long as possible.

I'm not a big fan of buying anything the first year it is out anyway. I'd like to hear some real-world reviews first.

"Any language where the unassuming word fly signifies an annoying insect, a means of travel, and a critical part of a gentleman's apparel is clearly asking to be mangled."

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

Yes, I am agreeing with you. For the same reasons I'm saying a jumper that is unconcsious is probably better off under a round. I know that if I were to make a jump where I was not going to do anything and just ride the parachute wherever it took me, I would choose a round over a ram-air anyday. Yes, even on a windy day.

And yes, I agree. In order to fly anything precisely, one needs to think ahead. How far ahead depends on the nature of what you're flying. Funny thing. I have about 20 jumps on T-10's and 5 on a Sierra (like a PC).

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

We are just going to have to be gentlemen and agree to disagree. My negative attitudes towards rounds are based upon 70 plus jumps under round canopies: C-8. C-9, T-10, CT-1, 3 different round reserves and 1.5 jumps on Crossbows (Para-Commander/Lemoigne class high performance rounds). I also have 5,000 jumps on a variety of square parachutes.
So, yes I am loud, opinionated and stubborn in my convictions, but those convictions are based on experience.
I still believe that unconscious pilots are better off hanging under large, docile square parachutes, similar to the (220 to 240 square foot) reserves we loan to first jump students.
For example, the smallest canopy offered in Rigging Innovations'/Precision's P124A/Aviator PEP is about 176 square feet. The biggest canopy offered in an Aviator has 290 square feet. Several times I deliberately landed P124A-290 canopies, down-wind, hands-off in the hard-pan desert of Lake Elsinore. None of those hands-off landings were as hard as T-10s.Similarly, when I worked fo rManley Butler, he only asked me to pack a handful of squares into PEPs, but they ranged from 340 to 220 square feet. The 220 square footer was for Mike Mangold, a jockey-sized fighter pilot with thousands of skydives.
Similarly, when Sean Tucker bailed out of his uncontrollable airplane, he deployed an Amigo 205.

Any rigger/dealer who sells anything smaller to a pilot deserves to be drummed out of business.

• Quote

[Pulse 0]

That's assuming you're landing in a clear area. But You're telling me someone flying into a wall at 10-mph is going to be the same as someone going 50-mph?

I'm not saying rounds would be better than ram-airs in the hands of capable cargo. Sean Tucker has been under parachutes before. His bail out was also from 8,000 feet where he had some time.

Sounds like we've got the same jump numbers when it comes to rounds. Interesting that we've formed two opposite opinions.

"Any language where the unassuming word fly signifies an annoying insect, a means of travel, and a critical part of a gentleman's apparel is clearly asking to be mangled."

[billvon 3,120]

>But You're telling me someone flying into a wall at 10-mph is going
>to be the same as someone going 50-mph?

?? Not sure of your point here. A clueless jumper under a square is more likely to hit a wall at 50mph than at 10mph due to the plain physics of the situation (more speed to deal with.)

[Pulse 0]

I'm not talking about 'clueless' jumpers. I'm talking unconscious.

"Any language where the unassuming word fly signifies an annoying insect, a means of travel, and a critical part of a gentleman's apparel is clearly asking to be mangled."

[billvon 3,120]

> I'm not talking about 'clueless' jumpers. I'm talking unconscious.

Same thing. Even in brakes, a square has more drive than a round - so you're more likely to land going faster.

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

> I'm not talking about 'clueless' jumpers. I'm talking unconscious.

Same thing. Even in brakes, a square has more drive than a round - so you're more likely to land going faster.

As riggerrob reported, large reserves can be configured to provide little forward speed and a more gentle vertical speed compared to the typical round reserves that pilots use. I've had enough jumps on small round reserves to know that I'd prefer a large square configured as described.

Are round reserves available for pilots that have a slow descent rate = big enough?

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[riggerrob 643]

Yes.
Check out Btuter Parachute Systems' HX-400, HX-500, HX-600 series of round canopies for pilot emergency parachutes.

[riggerrob 643]

The other difference is the ANGLE of arrival. Rounds tend to pound you in straight downwards, while square tend to strike a glancing blow at the planet.
Rounds tend to land straight down, only giving your center of gravity about a yard (meter) to absorb landing shock.
Meanwhile, squares have a much flatter angle of arrival, allowing jumpers many yards (meters) to slide or roll off excess energy.

Did anyone else notice the dramatic decrease in student injuries (mostly leg, pelvis and lower spine) that occured when the skydiving industry transitioned from rounds to square (for first jump students) during the 1980s? ? ?
Did anyone else notice that CSPA, USPA, etc. banned rounds for students circa 1990? ? ?

In other words, why sell a pilot an emergency parachute significantly different than the reserve you would strap onto a first jump student? ? ?

[Pulse 0]

This is all fine and good considering large ram-airs. Though I have yet to see jumpers dissipate energy while skidding for yards under a ram-air. I've seen people land at half-brakes, their feet impact first, then their head. I had a friend once wind up in a coma this way. But, that was not under what I would consider a 'large' ram-air.

My initial comment was more about why people should go with larger reserves rather than downsizing their container. If we're discussing large ram-air canopies and round canopies, what you're saying makes sense. But I'm thinking more along the lines of tiny reserves people are buying now.

"Any language where the unassuming word fly signifies an annoying insect, a means of travel, and a critical part of a gentleman's apparel is clearly asking to be mangled."

[riggerrob 643]

I apologize for the thread drift.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

But I'm thinking more along the lines of tiny reserves people are buying now.

[grue 1]

I'm a 1.2 wingload on my reserve, and I have no intention of doing either.

Why? Because they've flat out said the new reserve fabric isn't as strong.

cavete terrae.