Round or Ram-air Reserve?

[mark 107]

Quote

Rounds with freebags, are there any? What is required to make a freebag work with a round?

I haven't seen any freebag-deployed rounds, but I've seen several hilarious unintentionally free-sleeved rounds (oops! forgot to tie on the sleeve retainer line!). They opened just fine.

Mark

[obelixtim 150]

"what would it take to make it work" (roundie with a freebag)......

About an 80 foot long bridle cord.....

Probably not feasible due to the way a roundie opens compared to a square.....also it would slow the opening down enough to make it virtually useless in a low level deployment situation...

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[mark 107]

Quote

... advantages of round reserves vs. square.
...
2) Unconscious or disabled AAD opening. If you are unconscious or disabled, I would think the 3 to 5 mph canopy speed would be better for you.

One selling point of the Safety Flyer was that the brakes-set descent rate was about the same as commonly used round reserves.

Unconscious: all bets are off. Disabled, though, you may still be able to steer a square reserve sufficiently to land going straight, in a clear area, maybe even into the wind.

Who was it that said, "If you have an emergency and have to use your round reserve, you still have an emergency."?

Mark

[billvon 3,096]

>1. Freebag....much safer in 2 out situation....or a failure to cutaway a mal situation....

A free sleeve gives you the same reliability.

>Reliability....much more likely to open cleanly and quicker....

How many round openings have you seen? Just curious.

>and "if" you are out cold at the time, your descent will be fine because
> your brakes will still be set.....and there is no inherent malfunction mode,
>like a lineover.....

Lineovers can happen on both rounds and squares. If landing downwind, a round will land you with less speed than a square will even with the brakes stowed.

>A square is the best for Joe and Jane Jumper.......believe it.....

But what about Jim Jumper? As several people have pointed out, which canopy you choose depends on several factors. Most people choose squares, but nowadays that's primarily because jumpers simply never consider rounds. I've jumped rounds (both as reserves and mains) and would have no problem doing so under the right conditions.

[Avion 0]

Quote

My round was a 26' Navy Conical designed for ejection seats. I don't think it would have had any problems with high speeds nor is it prone to inversion problems (though it had no netting).

I did say most

Meaning, aside from ejection seats, the space shuttle, and top fuel dragsters (they only go 200mph anyway) most rounds of kind applicable to sport jumping are used for static line drops of troops and cargo.

And, with an ejection seat the pilot remains in the seat with the canopy attacted to the seat rather than the pilot. So, the seat takes and buffers the opening shock, right? Also, there's a delay between rocket assisted ejection (what do they call that, zero altitude capability) and canopy deployment. I would imagine horizontal speeds drop considerably during that time. Have you got any futher details on their operation?

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

and there is no inherent malfunction mode,
>like a lineover.....

Lineovers can happen on both rounds and squares.

ParaFlite's advertisements for the early square reserves claimed that (I think my memory is right on this) square reserves do not suffer from any inherent malfunction modes.

Quote

I've jumped rounds (both as reserves and mains) and would have no problem doing so under the right conditions.

Like landing in water? Nothing like praying you don't break anything on landing as you descend on a tiny round.

I think that the fear of having to smack in under a small round reserve is likely to have encouraged some to continue to try to fix main mals for too long. It is human nature that people will contemplate whether they would rather take the hard landing of a partially mal'd main, or the hard landing of a round reserve. Much better to know that your reserve can give you a nice gentle landing.

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

[JerryBaumchen 1,454]

TSO'd round canopies are still made by Free Flight (Gary Douris in Elsinore) and his Pre 5 uses a bag; I think that it is a free bag but am not sure.
I've jumped 6 round reserves (3 because I had to and 3 because I wanted to) and I've jumped 5 or 6 square reserves (all because I had to). Some rounds got me back to the DZ, some didn't; some squares got me back to the DZ, some didn't (you're usually low when the reserve opens). One square was as a demo on the beach (Oregon coast), I was VERY glad to have had a square that day.
Today, its a square because I can afford it, it's the latest technology and some DZ's require them. I have two of them.

[RogerRamjet 0]

Quote

Quote

My round was a 26' Navy Conical designed for ejection seats. I don't think it would have had any problems with high speeds nor is it prone to inversion problems (though it had no netting).

I did say most

Meaning, aside from ejection seats, the space shuttle, and top fuel dragsters (they only go 200mph anyway) most rounds of kind applicable to sport jumping are used for static line drops of troops and cargo.

And, with an ejection seat the pilot remains in the seat with the canopy attacted to the seat rather than the pilot. So, the seat takes and buffers the opening shock, right? Also, there's a delay between rocket assisted ejection (what do they call that, zero altitude capability) and canopy deployment. I would imagine horizontal speeds drop considerably during that time. Have you got any futher details on their operation?

No, with an ejection, the seat seperates from the pilot (this happens either immediately or after some freefall if above certain oxygen starved altitude). Then the reserve deploys attached to the pilot's harness the same as yours (except with Koch releases instead of 3-Ring). The Navy conical in a zero-zero ejection system is designed to open from 0-mph/0-altitude to 600mph/20,000ft (I wouldn't want to endure that last one though).

Overall though, you're correct, most round reserves in use were fairly low speed that were surplus (24' military types, etc.). However, sport manufacturers reserve canopies have to meet fairly high speed/high weight standards. I don't know what those are, but I remember seeing a Strong 26' lopo reserve test dropped at Z-Hills in the mid '70s from our 196 (Cessna 195 with 450 hp engine) with a 500lb dummy weight and going about as fast as that plane would go (maybe 200, 220?). Several drops were made and I saw no damage to the reserve.

I have nothing against square reserves, I was just pointing out that in certain circumstances, they have an advantage (IMO).

-----------------------
Roger "Ramjet" Clark
FB# 271, SCR 3245, SCS 1519

[RogerRamjet 0]

Quote

I think that the fear of having to smack in under a small round reserve is likely to have encouraged some to continue to try to fix main mals for too long.

I wasn't the heaviest guy on the dropzone, but I had no trouble standing up my 26' Navy Conical.

I have seen some pretty severe landings under the 24' military rounds of the past though

-----------------------
Roger "Ramjet" Clark
FB# 271, SCR 3245, SCS 1519

[riggerrob 643]

Let's consider how few active instructors have jumped round parachutes.
Nothing worse than being instructed on how to land a round parachute by some one who has never jumped one!
I believe that round reserves should only be jumped by guys who have "X" number of jumps on round mains.
My 70-ish jumps with round mains are not enough to jump a round reserve.
Besides, my DZO banned round reserves last year because our DZ is too close to town and too close to the Fraser River.

[obelixtim 150]

OK....Bill...and Rob....I'm replying to you both........
so don't take this as criticism....rather as my experience.......

I've done over 800 roundie jumps.....including 2 round reserve rides (never had a square reserve ride, despite carrying the thing for 18 years).......and as a rigger I've packed more than a thousand round reserves......front and rear mounted..............and over 2000 square reserve repacks......and about 200 of those packs in total, I've seen used in anger, of which two were fatal........both deployments while entangled with malfunctioning main canopies....one square, one round.......(the square was a tandem....2 dead....)

I've thought about this long and hard......and I'm not talking bullshit.......or theory.....so yeah.....I've seen it......

Freesleeve round reserves???????.......you don't understand.......do you......

Canopy slump........if the apex of the roundie isn't tied to the top of the sleeve.....on liftoff....as the pilot chute lifts the sleeve off the container....the canopy slips down inside the sleeve in a ball and locks the sleeve......seen it happen many times with round mains........high speed streamer......

Asymmetric deployment of a roundie (unstable opening) = blown periphery....almost every time....my first mal.....fortunately the reserve went all the way through and inverted completely...so it opened OK, but completely inside out...about a million burn holes......destroyed the canopy.....but a safe soft landing..........can't happen so easily with a square...........

A sleeve (or slider, as some bright spark suggested) on a roundie is designed to SLOW down the opening......not something you need at 500 feet.......on a square its not a problem to have a bag and slider.....without them the opening shock would probably kill you anyway, or the canopy could explode........no bonus there!!!!!!.....

Why do you think a freebagged round reserve was never invented????.........it was thought of.....but discounted......because it wouldn't work.....

You.......who don''t know or understand the physics of how a round opens as compared to a square....need to find out the facts before engaging in public discussions about what is right or wrong...........because ignorance is contagious.........and often fatal......

Square reserves ARE safer.....end of story!!!!!!..........Talk to any rigger who's been around since the 70's....they know!!!!!!!.

And.......I would also have no problem jumping a round reserve.........but a square is my preference....every time.....(also don't mind jumping with no AAD......or deploying at 2 grand.....comes with being an old fart I guess.......)......

So there.......

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[teason 0]

Quote

5 round reserve rides...even with good spots never came even close to the pea gravel..

Umm that means it wasn't a good spot, unless they were spotting for a more open area than the main LZ.

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[teason 0]

I guess I'll weigh in, we've had this thread before with a poll, if you search the threads, you'll find it.

Oblex has some very valid points on the inadequcies of the round design.

Round versus square ...... Sqaures are an all around better canopy.

Students jumping with square reserves when it's hitting the fan, that's where the debate lies.

I'm afraid I can only speak annecdotally but I have witnessed situations that (IMHO) would have been fatal if it had been two squares. A couple of years ago, I had a student land his main with his round reserve draped over top and before that, I saw a reserve melt itself on the main lines and still operate fine.

That's what sways safety towards rounds for me; their proclivity to land in all sorts of nasty configurations. Oblex himself mentioned that he had a round invert, suffer damage and still land ok.

That been my experience too. That's why I like them. They are not, however, perfect and in some situations, a square is far safer (tight landing areas for example). Here on the prairies, it's so flat, you could watch your dog runaway ... for three days) Some DZs have poor spotting and give little regard to obstacles.
Conversley, some instructor may be poor at teaching square reserve unusual situations.

I guess what I'm saying is that there are three other factors beyond round design that will determine safety.

1.) Caliber of students. With the increasing poulaurity of tandems, those that move on to solos may be of a higher calibre. Some DZs however still do primarily IADs/Static line
2.) DZ geography. May require a canopy that allows more options. Other DZs have nothing but open field
3.) instructional staff. More complicated equipment demands better and more vigilant instruction.

Just my perspective, nothing is black and white.

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


5 round reserve rides...even with good spots never came even close to the pea gravel..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Umm that means it wasn't a good spot, unless they were spotting for a more open area than the main LZ.

I landed 2 of thoseon the lz but not in the peas...1 was into the water which.. the LZ was all of Biscayne Bay in front of the M Boats with the "target" being a 20 man life raft. The other 2 were on RW loads out of bigger planes and I had no control over the spot. When I spotted back then I ALWAYS spotted for the reserve if I had to use it. If the winds were higher than I wanted to land a round.. I also sat it out... most of the time.

[tbrown 26]

Many a day I sat out from jumping due to the possibility of having to use my reserve.. and landing BACKWARDS under a round.. with wind of more than 10 mph... makes doing a PLF really hard.. its usually 3 points of contact ( Feet-Butt-Head) instead of the preferred 5 points of contact for a good PLF.

[sundevil777 102]

I cannot ever remember someone staying off a load because of high winds and a round reserve.

I can remember praying that I didn't have to use mine when I went up on windy days.

I am glad that doesn't happen anymore. Last 2 reserve rides have been so much more fun under canopy, and I don't like landing at 18 feet per second.

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

[councilman24 37]

I guess you haven't packed enough rounds yet, or you would have packed a free sleeve and a sort of free bag tso'd round.

The Strong Aerostar uses a free sleeve. The apex is retained with a strip of velcro much like a SL PC assist. The sleeve makes it very easy to pack into a strong seat with the canopy contained.

The Free Flight Preserve V is a semi free bag round that is certified for 150 knts and 275 lbs. It can go faster but they haven't done all the testing needed. It includes two break ties at or near the skirt, a bridle on the bag with sacrificial bartacks like a rock climbing shock absorber, a break tie holding the apex to bag, and a reinforced PC. If the load is sufficient to break all the bar tacks the bag comes free. Granted it comes free to lessen the shock, not to deploy in a horseshoe.
http://www.freeflightent.com/PV_Pack_Inst_V.pdf

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[sfzombie13 324]

i prefer rounds because they've been around longer, to me that gives me the feeling of safety, reassurance. i will need that in an emergency. the new sf-10a gave me my second stand-up landing, and that was with 15 knot winds gusting to 20. if my rigger packs it, it will open. if it opens, it will save my life. or not....the chances we take. end of story. they don't all work all the time. you're not always in the good situation, you're not always going to walk away from one. or maybe you will. or maybe when you hit the ground, you get shot, or maybe in the air....oh yea, i'm not in the military anymore.....you get the idea smeger....listen to what they tell you and if you need to plf, keep your feet and knees together.....

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

prefer rounds because they've been around longer

Newer or older doesn't always mean better.

Quote

if my rigger packs it, it will open.

Not necessarily.

Quote

if it opens, it will save my life. or not

That is 100% true.

Square reserves are much better for most skydiving applications.

Derek

[sfzombie13 324]

read it again, it's all 100% true. hold on, can a rigger pack a container lock on a reserve? they are all true statements. you can do everything 100% perfect and still die.....cool huh?

_________________________________________
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes

[obelixtim 150]

About the only rounds I pack these days are glider or hang glider rigs.....haven't seen any of these new ones at all but I can't see that there would be much of a market amongst the sport skydiving community......

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

read it again, it's all 100% true. hold on, can a rigger pack a container lock on a reserve? they are all true statements. you can do everything 100% perfect and still die.....cool huh?

Yes, a rigger can pack a container lock. So no, they are not all true statements, if your rigger packs it, it may still not open.

Just because something has been around along time doesn't make it better. If that was true, everyone would be jumping round mains and reserves with belly mounts.

Derek