Reserve Wingloading?

[Sebazz1 2]

How are most people wingloading their reserves? I am on the verge of buying new gear and stuff and was just wondering.
Safety vs. Small Rig? Thats the argument right?
Seb

[MarkM 0]

Mine's at around 1.0 to 1 which should bring me down in once piece if I'm under it unconscious.

[skybytch 273]

Quote

Safety vs. Small Rig? Thats the argument right?

Yup! What follows is of course only my opinion and I am the Canopy Nazi....
Consider what the smallest all-F111 seven cell canopy is that you are are confident you can land safely in someone's backyard if you had to. Consider what the smallest all-F111 seven cell you'd be willing to have land you downwind with the brakes stowed should your Cypres (or good friend For some people a loading of 1.6:1 isn't out of the question. For me a loading of 1.1-1.2:1 is quite small enough thank you! pull and flare,
lisa
--
Life is tough, but I'm tougher

[freeflir29 0]

1.4:1 or so on a PD 176. I should live......."It's the cans..they're defective. Stay away from the cans"-Steve Martin
Clay

[amir1967 0]

What happen to your'e beers
AM67

[Tee 0]

Hi there. You also have to take into consideration of having a highspeed reserve deployment, you will want the canopy and the lines to be able to hold up to your body weight without problems. Each manufacturer has their own "guidelines" for maximum weight allowances...I have attached a couple of websites as an example. Hope that helps. http://www.performancedesigns.com/products/reserve.html
http://www.airtec.co.za/tempo.htm
http://precision.aerodynamics.com/top/ravntabl.htm
Tee

• Quote

[Sebazz1 2]

Lisa,
I am a experienced jumper, with a bit of a conservative streak in me. I way almost 225 lbs fully geared. I am looking at the PD reserve 143 or 160. On the PD chart that Tee sent it indicates that these two canopies have the same max loading? I jump a stilleto 135 as my main (and will continue to do so) Isn't there a point when you order a main container that the differences between main and reserve size need to be proportional? The diff. between a 135 and 160 for instance, is it doable for container maker?
I never bought new gear so I never educated myself on these things.
Thanks for your help! Maybe I'll order through Square One.
Seb

[Sebazz1 2]

Thank you Tee that was very nice.
Seb

[Tee 0]

Quote

Thank you Tee that was very nice

No problem...that's what we're all here for Tee

[billvon 3,107]

>On the PD chart that Tee sent it indicates that these two canopies have the same max loading?
This does not imply that they will land a similar weight in a similar way. I believe that most PD reserves are certified under TSO C23c, and that TSO sets a limit of 254 lbs for all skydiving equipment. (Odd, I know.) C23d allows you to test with different weights and thus certify to different weights.
>I jump a stilleto 135 as my main (and will continue to do so) Isn't there a point when you order a main container that the differences between main and reserve size need to be proportional?
Depends on the rig manufacturer. Many manufacturers (like RI) are starting to make containers designed for much larger reserves than mains. There's no inherent requirement that they be similar sizes beyond safety - two 160 sq ft canopies will likely behave themselves when deployed simultaneously, a 218 and a 97 probably will not. However, there's no reason a rig can't be constructed to take such a combination - I have a friend who has a Reflex built for just that combination.
-bill von

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

Consider what the smallest all-F111 seven cell canopy is that you are are confident you can land safely in someone's backyard if you had to

Is it not the case that the stuff we call F-111, when new, is of a similar perosity to ZP? Since reserves rarely have more then 5 jumps on them, can't we assume that reserves are almost always equivalent in fabric to their ZP counterparts?
While staying within the manufacturers placarding, doesn't this mean that we can safely nudge the wingloading beyond 1.1:1? Notice I said nudge, not launch...
Does the difference in fabric make more of a difference then the difference in shape? Is it sill the case that all reserves are 7 cells? Are there any 9 cells on the market? Are they all shaped like Manta's, or more like a Triathlon?
My thoughts after loading my Tempo at 1.1:1 was that I found the control range very deep. I was at completely full arm extention during the flare. On a moderate wind day I had dificulty getting penetration. This may sound weird, but I actually WANT to load my next reserve a bit more. I like getting forward drive on my canopy... I hope there's a reserve out there designed for it.
When I buy my next reserve, I will probably load it at about 1.25. I load my main at just under 1.5

[flow 1]

I'm loading mine 1.2 to 1. It's Parachutes de France Techno 155.
j.

[3fLiEr 0]

I load mine at 1.6 - slightly higher than my main (main Sabre135 reserve PD126)
Which may be seen as a little to much to be honest........
but I dont have a problem with it..............
bsbd
"In a world where we are slaves to gravity I am pleased to be a freedom fighter"

[skybytch 273]

Quote

can't we assume that reserves are almost always equivalent in fabric to their ZP counterparts?

I prefer not to assume anything. Yes, the fabric on a brand new reserve will allow very little air to pass through but it is still not equivalent to zp fabric - I speak from experience packing both reserves and zp mains, it's way easier to put a brand new reserve in the bag than a zp main.

Quote

Does the difference in fabric make more of a difference then the difference in shape? Is it sill the case that all reserves are 7 cells? Are there any 9 cells on the market? Are they all shaped like Manta's, or more like a Triathlon?

My point is that most jumpers today have never jumped an all F111 seven cell of any size. They don't fly, flare or land like a Sabre... I've never seen a 9 cell reserve. Have seen some 5 cells though. Shaping is the traditional rectangle.

Quote

My thoughts after loading my Tempo at 1.1:1 was that I found the control range very deep. I was at completely full arm extention during the flare.

Try flying a different brand reserve. But imho you can expect the control range on any reserve to be deeper than that of your zp nine cell main - deeper even than on a seven cell zp main.

Quote

When I buy my next reserve, I will probably load it at about 1.25.

Demo before you buy.
pull and flare,
lisa
--
What would Scooby Doo?

[riggerrob 643]

Andy Man,
Shape makes far more difference than fabric choice.
Gelvenor Textile Mills (the factory that supplies fabric to Aerodyne, PISA, etc.) brags that their 0-3 cfm reserve fabric consistently tests at 1.5 cubic feet minute. That is too close to zero-porousity to argue.
My old F-111 Cruislite didn't soften up until after 60 jumps. From that I extrapolate that a reserve will have less than 3 cfm porousity for most of its service life. Again, too small to argue.
The real issue here is shape. Nobody builds elliptically tapered reserves. Therefore you can expect a rectangular reserve to glide, turn and flare radically different than a tapered main.
Reserves have been built with 5, 7 and 9 cells.
Most people consider 5 cell reserves obsolete because of their mediocre gliding and flaring characteristics.
Seven cell reserves are by far the most popular, but they have not changed much since the configuration was perfected by the Pegasus, circa 1980.
Precision tried to market the 9 cell Falcon series of reserves, but few skydivers were willing to pay for the extra bulk. Today the only 9 cell reserves are huge, tandem huge.
Because of their shape, 7 cell reserves glide steeper and require a much deeper flare than modern mains. Note: steering lines on Tempos are the longest of any reserve. The only modern mains that fly like reserves are 7 cell Triathlons. Before you buy a tiny reserve, I strongly encourage you to test jump a Triathlon the same size.

[billvon 3,107]

>Since reserves rarely have more then 5 jumps on them, can't we assume that reserves are almost always
>equivalent in fabric to their ZP counterparts?
No. Porosity is related to number of pack jobs, not number of deployments. Look at a relatively new reserve that has been jumped under a strong light - you'll note fabric wear along the fold lines, not in the "high pressure" areas.
>doesn't this mean that we can safely nudge the wingloading beyond 1.1:1? Notice I said nudge, not launch...
You can nudge it as high as you like. There's no "line in the sand" where you become unsafe. If you think you can land even a perfect 1.2 to 1 7-cell canopy in someone's backyard surrounded by trees, you might choose that size reserve. That being said, I have never been under a sport reserve wishing it were smaller.
-bill von

[Shark 0]

Great info. In another related matter, when does a reserve become unairworthy? Or rather, how. If the number of times it has been re-packed affects it as much as it has jumps, then older/used wouldn't have to long of a "shelf" life, right? I've got an old Raven that had one jump when I got it, and I put on another.

[billvon 3,107]

>Great info. In another related matter, when does a reserve become unairworthy? Or rather, how. If the number of times
>it has been re-packed affects it as much as it has jumps, then older/used wouldn't have to long of a "shelf" life, right?
Depends on the mftr. PD has a limit of 40 repacks before it has to go back to them for inspection, but there's no age limit. Precision does not have a similar limit, and in fact George Galloway wrote an article on whether it was legal for a rigger to repack a Raven I that had been used as a main for 200 jumps as a reserve. (In his opinion, it was.) I wish I could find that article - it was a good one.
-bill von

[Watcher 0]

Im at 1.7:1 on my PD113R, I fly a 120 Nitron, and would not have a problem putting that reserve down in a 20 x 10 space with barking dogs and a kiddie pool, now if i was unconcious then maybe id have wished i had a larger reserve, but im acknowledgeing take that risk and placeing it as acceptable my choice though. The reserve itself has spanwise and chordwise reinforcement and have faith that its not going to blow up.
Jonathan
--
Jonathan Bartlett
watcher1@cc.gatech.edu
D-24876

[weid14 0]

hey Bill, I remember seeing that over on wreck. a few yuears ago... maybe a goggle search?

[weid14 0]

i think this is the one..... from wreck.dot
The original question was:
"Is there anything inherently unsafe, illegal or immoral about using a
Raven II that has 300 jumps but is in otherwise good condition as a
reserve? Obviously, the Raven was used as a main. The reason I'm asking
is that I recently bought a new container. I took the Ravens out of the
old container and put them in the new one. I've been thinking about
setting the old container up as a backup rig, and one of the local
jumpers has a Raven II for sale. She took good care of it so I
personally would have no qualms about using it as a main or, based on
your input, as a reserve. So, what do you think?"
IMHO, the best answers were given (in no particular order) by:
1)Tim "A canopy that is TSO'D as a certified canopy can be used as a
certified canopy, regardless of the number of jumps as long as it is
deemed airworthy by a certified rigger...
2)kleggo "inspect it,if it passes ... jump with it..."
3)David S. Clarkson "...follow the manufacturer's instructions (It may
be used as one or the other [if FAA approved for use as a reserve] but
it is not to be used as a reserve if it has been intentionally jumped as
a main canopy. One familiarization jump is allowable prior to packing
for reserve use.)
Right, David, excellent observation. That comment in the Owner's
manual is intended to encourage our customers to exercise good common
sense in choosing which container to pack their Raven into... Notice it
says "not to be used"... does that mean it can be legally packed but not
legally deployed? (big troll here)
4)bill von "when's the last time a well-maintained F111 7-cell main just
"blew up?"
5)rrrockey1@aol.com "The guy who seals it has to determine its
airworthiness"
My response to the customer was:
When a Raven canopy leaves the factory as new, it is placarded to be
certified under the authority of the TSO process. What this means is,
the design has been tested to a certain standard, and the design of this
particular canopy is consistent with a similar canopy which has been
drop tested successfully.
The parallel scenario in general aviation would be a Cessna aircraft
which leaves the assembly line in Wichita is dispatched with an
airworthiness certificate.
A Raven Reserve is only certified to be airworthy 120 days at a time,
just as the Cessna undergoes an annual inspection before it is "in
license" and declared to be airworthy.
Your question to me would be like calling Cessna Aircraft Company to see
if your used airplane can pass the annual inspection. In the case of a
parachute, it is the Parachute Rigger's discression and responsibility
to declare airworthiness for a given canopy. There in no magic number of
jumps which would subjectively disqualify a canopy for use as a reserve,
on the basis of "number of jumps" only.
This is strictly a question of judgement.... both your judgement (as the
person putting the canopy on your back), and your rigger's judgement as
to the airworthiness of that particular canopy at this pack cycle.
Most people seem willing to jump any old rag as a main canopy but they
want their reserve to be a pristine virgin. An acceptable range of
reality may reside somewhere in between. If you were to ask me if I
would exit the aircraft with a 300 jump Raven packed in a single canopy
pilot's emergency rig, my answer would probably depend on how close the
aircraft fire was getting to the fuel tanks

[riggerrob 643]

After 20 jumps, we take Strong tandem reserves out of service.
We re-lined some of the old reserves with Dacron lines and put a few hundred jumps on them.

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

I way almost 225 lbs fully geared. I am looking at the PD reserve 143 or 160. On the PD chart that Tee sent it indicates that these two canopies have the same max loading? I jump a stilleto 135 as my main (and will continue to do so) Isn't there a point when you order a main container that the differences between main and reserve size need to be proportional? The diff. between a 135 and 160 for instance, is it doable for container maker?

I load my main at a little over 1.6, and my reserve at 1.35.. My container(Mirage M3X) is sized for a 120 main, 160 reserve combo.. You can get them to size it as an M3X+.5 to fit a 135 main in it.. A few manufacturers offer such combinations, but not all.......and if you don't see it listed on their normal size chart, call and ask..
I've landed reserves at .8 to 1.5, and I much prefer lower wing loadings......chances are you won't be in a good spot when the shit hits the fan..
Mike

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

Depends on the rig manufacturer. Many manufacturers (like RI) are starting to make containers designed for much larger reserves than mains.

Did you find out recently that RI is going to do a small main/larger reserve combo? I've asked Sandy about it a couple times, and the most recent he said he really needs to consider it based on the demand.. I told him I'd be the first to buy a Voodoo if he can give me one for a 120 main/160 reserve..

Quote

a 218 and a 97 probably will not. However, there's no reason a rig can't be constructed to take such a combination - I have a friend who has a Reflex built for just that combination.

That must be Windsor.....what kind of rig does he have?
Mike

[PhreeZone 20]

Mike he said " have a friend who has a Reflex built for just that combination."
I'd say its a good bet its a Reflex
Does'nt Windsor jump an FX 97 and a Raven 218?
I want to touch the sky, I want to fly so high ~ Sonique