So many canopies, so little credit line...

[chopchop 0]

Ok, I am a young jumper but I can't help but comment. I really agree with Sebazz about really being able to control your canopy before downsizing. I get the feeling that a lot of young jumpers downsize to get the rush of speed on landing when they could get as good a swoop just by learning how to fly their existing canopy. I fly a Tri220 at 1.1:1 or somethign like that. It is safe for me. At a little over 220 jumps, I am just learning how to be really consistent and maneuver close to the ground. I feel I could put another 200 jumps on it before I would come close to maxing out this very tame canopy. I did go through the phase of wanting to buy speed by downsizing and flying a higher performance canopy and did some demos and it was a blast but it wasn't speed created by a good pilot - it was speed created by a higher wing loading and a performance canopy. Did i feel as safe and in control? No. Because I wasn't. I know I will eventually fly smaller canopies and I will learn to hook turn and swoop but I am not going to rush the most dangerous part of our sport. I know that by downsizing, we get great swoops without any real skill. I think that gives people the feeling that they know what they are doing. That is scary and very, very dangerous.
OK, fire away.
chopchop
PD makes canopies all day long, you only have one life, when in doubt, cut away...

[rhino 0]

Michigan has great weather for a change.. Still a bit cold but clear!! I'll call the weatherman and get rid of those winds for you..
Blue Skies .....

[rhino 0]

chopchop,
Good for you.. Don't downsize until you are ready.. And I mean REALLY ready. Anyone that flies at extreme wing loadings on hp canopies is willing to except the risk reward factor. Getting hurt is a chance I am willing to take. But I don't believe I will because I'm a safe, planning, calculating bastard.
I really agree with Sebazz about really being able to control your canopy before downsizing.
I understand what you are saying. After you progress and you feel what a high performance canopy feels like you will understand what I mean by actually having more control over your canopies flight, flying the canopy and not having it fly you. I'll give you a quick example. I was jumping at SkydiveUSA in Texas some 3 years ago under a falcon210, high wind day, I shouldn't have jumped but I did, the canopy was flying me, BACKWARDS. That was the last day I jumped rental gear at that DZ. Since then the only rental gear I have jumped had been new equipment, mains under 150sqare feet. I didn't like being flown by the canopy. That is what I felt.
That Triathlon will treat you very well.. I loaded mine at 1.25 and it was a GREAT canopy.
Rhino
Blue Skies .....

[kallend 2,162]

I'm not sure I understand your points, Bill.
Should a flatlander from Illinois or Iowa have to make a trek to a mountainous region before you consider them qualified to downsize?
Are you suggesting practising rear riser flares just in case you need to make one someday? Seems an odd sort of risk management unless you mean to practice them at altitude.

[billvon 3,121]

>Should a flatlander from Illinois or Iowa have to make a trek to a
>mountainous region before you consider them qualified to downsize?
If they never intend to jump anywhere but a flat DZ, then I'd consider it useful but not vital. However, history has shown that such intentions are not borne out - people who insist they will never land out sometimes do, people who insist they don't need night jump training sometimes jump after sunset. Claiming "I'll never jump after sunset" should not remove the requirement to prove that you can. Similarly, claiming "I'll never have to land on a slope" does not remove the desirability of performing that manuever, although it makes it less critical.
>Are you suggesting practising rear riser flares just in case you need to make one
> someday? Seems an odd sort of risk management unless you mean to practice
> them at altitude.
Yes. It is both doable and a good skill to have. It involves some risk, but most skydiving training does.
-bill von

[rhino 0]

Billvon,
With all due respect.. I will not make it a practice of landing with rear risers unless I absolutely have to do it down low. I for one am not willing to assume the risk yet. I practice that risky stuff upstairs. If I need to do it low "which I have successfully" I will not scared shitless because I know how my canopy responds from doing it up high.
I'd be interested to know how many people on here have ACTUALLY landed in rear risers unless they had to? I wonder if hook practices rear riser landings on his vx60?
Rhino
Blue Skies .....

[rogue108 0]

Rhino,
This discussion about how well you can fly canopy is getting pretty old. You talk like a canopy control expert, but how many jumps do you have or how much canopy time? When did it become a discussion about your canonpy skills? When you brought it up and said how skilled you were on your canopy. You seem to have a problem with other calling you out on your skill level, but overconfidence kills.

[rhino 0]

If it is getting pretty old than post somewhere else..
Blue Skies .....

[rogue108 0]

Its just my opinion that your bragging about canopy control seems old. It doesn't bother me enough to stop posting. I just choose not to listen to you, but I will stop this before I drive this thread any further off topic.

[kallend 2,162]

<<<>Are you suggesting practising rear riser flares just in case you need to make one
> someday? Seems an odd sort of risk management unless you mean to practice
> them at altitude.
Yes. It is both doable and a good skill to have. It involves some risk, but most skydiving training does.>>>
Why is the risk less doing it for practice than doing it for real? Seems a bit like spin training for pilots, which the FAA eventually decided killed more pilots than inadvertant spins themselves, so they no longer require it.
Seems to me that practising anything involving risk is only effective if the risk of the "real thing" is significantly greater than the risk of the practice. I don't believe you can make that case for rear riser flares.

[rhino 0]

It is just my opinion but I think you are instigating. This is the GEAR AND RIGGING forum. Get your personal shit to the talkback forum.
Blue Skies .....

[riggerrob 643]

May I jump into this debate over rear riser flares?
Last month I watched a guy do an aggressive hook turn, straighten out, then fly straight into the grass. We sprinted out to find him laying there groaning about a sore back and complaining that he "lost a toggle." Fortunately the ground (a re-claimed swamp) was soft and he walked out of hospital that evening. Later we found his steering toggle securely tied onto his steering line!
Second example: last year a German instructor - jumping in Elsinore, California - broke a steering line as he turned onto final approach. The ensuing crash broke a lot of bones!
My point is: steering lines wear out first. Modern, heavily loaded canopies open soft and turn hard. They can pull more Gs during that last turn than they do during opening shock.
A quick grab at the rear risers would have saved both these guys a whole lot of pain, if they were familiar with rear riser flares.
This is a big "IF." IF they had practiced rear riser flares up high, they would have limped away from their landings. I practice rear riser flares on a regular basis. I haven't had the courage to flare with rear risers at 8 feet, but I am gradually working my way down there.
Finally, the latest technique for blade-running competitors is to do the first 2/3 of the flare with rear risers, then finish with toggles.
Sooner or later, you will have to flare with rear risers, far better to learn the technique at 2,000' than at 10'!
As for the FAA deleting spin training from private pilot training, a lot of old school instructors never agreed, neither did Transport Canada. I did dozens of spins before earning my Canadian Private Pilot License and I intend to do a few more before my commercial pilot check ride. As long as you have decent instruction, spins are a confidence-building exercise. Spin training can make the difference between "neutralize ailerons, nose down, stop spin with rudder, okay, got some airspeed, ease back on wheel" or abject panic. Which pilot would you rather fly with?

[rhino 0]

I made 5 jumps yesturday and practiced rear riser flairs. I don't have room to screw up under the canopy I fly. I'll practice up high. If I have to do it down low I am VERY familiar with the timing and the rock point using rear risers. I'm not going to land that way until FAAAAR in the distant future.
Rhino
Blue Skies .....

[kallend 2,162]

<<neither did Transport Canada. I did dozens of spins before earning my Canadian Private Pilot License and I
intend to do a few more before my commercial pilot check ride.>>>
That's the attitude! Student pilots are disposable. Who cares if a few get lost during spin training.
(p.s. Bet I've done more spins than you have)

[billvon 3,121]

>Why is the risk less doing it for practice than doing it for real?
Because you can choose a perfect approach over a perfect landing area in perfect conditions to try, and if anything goes wrong you can bail out with the toggles.
>Seems a bit like spin training for pilots, which the FAA eventually decided
>killed more pilots than inadvertant spins themselves, so they no longer require it.
I disagree with this philosophy. Even if you kill 2 pilots in the practice area practicing spins, it's worth it if it avoids 1 death on the ground due to a stall/spin on final near an urban airport, or the death of 1 passenger in the same plane. The pilot chooses to take the risk - the person on the ground/passenger does not.
Note that this is a very different case than most skydiving issues, since most skydivers do not carry passengers, and most skydiving accidents do not kill whuffos. (There are exceptions of course.)
>Seems to me that practising anything involving risk is only effective if the risk of
>the "real thing" is significantly greater than the risk of the practice. I don't believe
> you can make that case for rear riser flares.
There are three reasons for pushing rear riser flares that I can see.
One, it lets you land successfully when your toggle breaks. This reduces the risk of a reserve mal, if your only other option when a toggle breaks is to use your reserve. Or it increases your chances of walking away from a rear riser landing if you do decide to land the main anyway.
Two, it teaches you how your canopy flies. Rear riser flaring is a significantly different way to change the AOA of the canopy, with different effects on stall break etc.
Three, to me, it's a 'gating' event. If you can't do it, or are afraid to, it's a pretty good sign that you shouldn't be downsizing. If there is a requirement to do it before downsizing, and that slows down even 20% of the people who are downsizing too quickly, it has done some good beyond its other effects.
-bill von

[billvon 3,121]

>I don't have room to screw up under the canopy I fly.
I hope I misunderstood you there - if you're jumping under a canopy that gives you no room to screw up, you won't last long. Everyone screws up. The trick is having a canopy that lets you screw up and the experience flying it to be able to use that extra margin.
>I made 5 jumps yesturday and practiced rear riser flairs. . . . I'm not going
>to land that way until FAAAAR in the distant future.
I find this an interesting statement for two reasons. One, I've noticed that you have credited much of your ability to land HP canopies to the experience you have gained by opening high and playing with the canopy. If that indeed prepares you well to land high performance canopies, why are you worried about taking that rear riser practice from up high and applying it to an actual landing? Do you worry that practice up high might _not_ adequately prepare you for doing an actual landing?
Two, didn't you successfully land a 110 sqft elliptical canopy with rear risers? Seems like a 12% difference in canopy size, while a cause for concern, shouldn't make it neary impossible to repeat.
-bill von

[skybytch 273]

Quote

I don't have room to screw up under the canopy I fly.

If you don't have a little "room to screw up" under the canopy you fly, what are you going to do when everything goes to shit? Have you accepted the idea that when shit happens you're likely to be badly injured and are you prepared for that (ie medical insurance and a will)? Don't expect that shit _won't_ happen to you - none of us are that special.
pull & flare,
lisa
---
On the other hand...you have different fingers

[kallend 2,162]

<<One, it lets you land successfully when your toggle breaks. This reduces the risk of a reserve mal, if your only other
option when a toggle breaks is to use your reserve. Or it increases your chances of walking away from a rear riser
landing if you do decide to land the main anyway.>>>
OK, let's say the probability of a steering line mal is 0.05% (I'd say this was high from what I've seen) and the probability of injuring yourself landing with rear risers is 50% if you haven't previously practised. So overall the probability of injuring yourself on any given jump due to this cause is 0.025%
Let's also guess that the chance of injuring yourself under "perfect" practice conditions is only 1% (and I'd say this is low). So the overall probability of injury if you practice a rear riser flare is 40x the probability than if you don't. YMMV of course, but I believe these are conservative numbers.
<<< Two, it teaches you how your canopy flies. Rear riser flaring is a significantly different way to change the AOA of the
canopy, with different effects on stall break etc.>>>
But you can (and should) learn that at altitude, not 5 feet agl.

[billvon 3,121]

>OK, let's say the probability of a steering line mal is 0.05% (I'd say this was
> high from what I've seen) and the probability of injuring yourself landing with >rear risers is 50% if you haven't previously practised.
50%!!!! What?? I think you're off by about two orders of magnitude. .5% would be closer to the true number. I've seen perhaps 100 rear riser landings and no injuries beyond scraped knees. And it goes without saying that you _should_ practice, up high first then down lower - and that you should get advice/instruction before you try.
>But you can (and should) learn that at altitude, not 5 feet agl.
You cannot judge how fast your canopy is descending by looking at your altimeter. You need a ground reference. 50 feet might be a good altitude to do that at, since you can see how you've reduced your descent.
-bill von

[rhino 0]

EXCUSE ME Bytch and Billvon...
I don't know if either of you have ever flown a loaded canopy or if you even have the foggiest clue as to what I mean by no room to screw up.. Maybe someday you will find out and not take comments so literally. Maybe you both need to get LAID
Anyhow.. I enjoy walking the line and if I go in I do it of my own free will.. As does ANY canopy pilot.
And with that Good night
Nothing but love Rhino
Blue Skies .....

[skybytch 273]

Quote

Maybe you both need to get LAID

How many times have you been told? How many more is it going to take before you'll hear it? Personal attacks are not welcome here.
pull & flare,
lisa
---
On the other hand...you have different fingers