Hook v Downsize

[Jib 0]

I told an instructor that I had no intention of downsizing until I was comfortable with a 270 under my present canopy, at least 500 jumps. The instructor seemed to not like the concept of my doing a 270 as a prerequisite to downsizing. So, which is worse? Why? Do you think this plays into the race to downsize?

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[AggieDave 6]

I don't know your instructor and I don't know where he was coming from, BUT I know that I would prefer to hear my former students say "I want to become very proficent at flying my canopy before downsizing." That would make my day, instead of the usual "I want to buy a 111sq ft canopy and be like the DZO" that I've got to deal with.

I will tell you, even though its a larger canopy, a Sabre2 loaded at 1.3:1 will freak'n perform. Actually, I bet you'd be surprised at how well it will perform.

Can I recommend you really do your homework and go through a beginner AND "advanced" canopy course before you really get cranking?


A little about me, I didn't start really trying to learn how to swoop until I had around 180-200 jumps. At that point I was flying beyond my ability to begin with, I was jumping fully elliptical 170s loaded at about 1.7:1 and I firmly believe that the reason I'm still here today is due to a LOT of luck and some good old fasion prayer from my mom. I put a lot of jumps on that old Heatwave of mine before moving on, though...if only I would have stayed at a lower wingloading and learned slower, I believe I would have progressed further then I have now and be a better canopy pilot then I've been. Its only recently that I feel like my canopy skills have caught up with my jump numbers, even then I feel like I'm pretty average for my jump numbers and wingloading when compared to others who have progressed in more of a correct manner.


Good luck to you, and I hope (I know you will do the right thing) you start small and don't start cranking 90's, 180s, etc.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[pccoder 0]

Good for you. Use every bit of potential that larger canopy has. But, learn how to fly it from someone who can truly help. Don't just assume that because you are hanging underneath it that you know how to fly it. The canopy courses are a great idea.

PcCoder.net

[Kris 0]

Yup...learn to wring the piss out of the canopy you have now, and those skills will transfer over to your next canopy.

Hell, I've got over 300 jumps on my Stiletto 190, and everytime I think about getting rid of it, I learn another nifty new trick.

Another advantage is that I'm comfy with it, so it's mentally easier for me to try certain new things (flare turns, etc...) and to keep refining things I've been doing since I got it (flat turns, bringing down my flare height, etc...).

Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and
Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™

[GravityGirl 0]

What am I missing here?

I don't think that doing a 270 on a Sabre2 210 is a good idea at your jump numbers.

I think for sure he should dial it in. But a 270 IS NOT a criteria for downsizing.

What is your exit weight?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Peace and Blue Skies!
Bonnie ==>Gravity Gear!

[billvon 3,092]

> I told an instructor that I had no intention of downsizing until I was
>comfortable with a 270 under my present canopy, at least 500 jumps.

You can use whatever criterion you like. I would go more with survival skills than with a 270 hook, but if you like it as a measuring point, that's OK. Just make sure you can do all the other stuff too (like bail on approaches, flat turn, flare turn etc)

[davelepka 4]

Thats a big turm for a 210. The trouble is that your canopy will have to be 270'd at a very low altitude, which is not a great idea.

A bigger canopy, at a lower WL will not have much of a recovery arc. All of your turns for swooping will have to be low, but a 90, for example, is a very low commitment turn. Your intended landing path is very close to your base leg direction, and in turn, it's easy to keep a clear path through the entire arc of your turn for outs. Furthermore, your pendulum effect under your canopy will be minnimized, and the simpler turn has a higher probability of going as planned (all good things close to the ground).

A 270 on the other hand has several problems. Firstly, unless you are landing in the center of a large field with no traffic of any kind, you cannot ensure outs throughout the entire turn. Second, you are increasing the commitment level of your turn, and most likely the amount of pendulum you will incur in doing so. Finally, the riser pressures on larger canopies will build quickly, and the harness response to input will be nil. The result is that if you should loose your strength, or simply your grip, during the turn, you have no recourse for completing the turn. These are all bad things close to the ground.

A jumper on a more highly loaded canopy wil have several advantages in doing 270's. More altitude when entering the turn, lower riser pressures and more effective harness turns all combine to build in a margin of safety.

A better thought for you would be to become proficient with your canopy in all flight modes, and limit your landing speed manuvers to douple fronts and 90 degree approaches. When you can exhibit a high degree of control and consistency in your approaches as well as throughout your swoop, consider downsizing.

Once you have downsized, become proficient with the same skills that you were practicing on your last canopy before moving to a larger, more complex truns.

It is a double edged sword, between swooping and downsizing, but a well thought out progression, and commitment to developing your skills, as well as being honest with yourself about the level of those skills should serve you well in your persuit.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

I told an instructor that I had no intention of downsizing until I was comfortable with a 270 under my present canopy, at least 500 jumps. The instructor seemed to not like the concept of my doing a 270 as a prerequisite to downsizing. So, which is worse? Why? Do you think this plays into the race to downsize?

1. Turns greater than 90 degrees can point you at people you can't see, can confuse the people landing behind you, and/or break the landing pattern.

2. Speed comes from altitude lost and not how far you turn. You'll get much more speed from a carving 90 degree turn over a few hundred feet than a snapped 270 in less altitude.

3. You can get plenty of speed from a carving 90 degree turn.

While landing with some induced speed is a _fine_ idea as an alternative to down sizing (It's better to have the speed when you want it than to be stuck with it when you don't) turns over 90 degrees have disadvantages.

[Jib 0]

I should have prefaced the question better. I didn't mean to suggest I had any thought of doing a 270 anytime soon. I meant at least 500 more jumps for a total 700 at current size canopy (gained a few pounds to go from 1.2 to 1.3) and about 600 under the Sabre 2. I also meant after I could complete the Billvon criteria before downsizing and be comfortable with a 270 on top of it rather that downsizing earlier...

Thanks Dave and Drew. That's what I was looking for.

--------------------------------------------------
the depth of his depravity sickens me.
-- Jerry Falwell, People v. Larry Flynt

[davelepka 4]

Just to be clear, I was aware that your end goal was more jumps and a 270 on your current wing (with the 270 coming late in the game).

Just to be clear, my assertion is that a 270 on that canopy at any number of jumps doen;t look good from a risk vs. benefit standpoint.

As an example, I have borrowed a Spectre 135 (at 1.5) when I was on three or four lifts in a row. I found a 180 was sufficient for swooping the crap out of it. My regular landings are all between 270 and 450 and canopies at 2.0 and up.