new record

[cobaltdan 0]

the smallest cobalt we have produced is a 25 sq '.
although it is possible we will not allow our pilots to attempt a landing.
-dan
atair
www.extremefly.com

[drenaline 0]

Hey Dan what about a water landing with the 25 sq' ?
"Life is full of danger, so why be afraid?"
drenaline

[MiataDRM 0]

John Heady ROCKS! He was my JM/Instructor for many of my student jumps, and I was his first check dive...he signed me off and blessed w/ my A license! He is very knowledgeable and willing to share what he knows in a calm and relaxed manner and makes the new guy/gal feel comfortable.
**I'm a Pschydiver!
Majdi

[ernokaikkonen 0]

>I must be mistaken, but I thought Luigi jumped the VX 46 with weights for
>wingloadings of up to 4.6. Did he not?
According to:
http://www.icaruscanopies.com/teamXtreme.htm
...Luigi's highest wingloading has been 4.2.
Erno

[diver123 0]

That's absolutely amazing~!
I guess it's now official, all my FAT friends can now go skydiving!!! Watch out for the meteor shower!!! :)
"pull high! It's lower than you think..."

[quade 4]

Quote

the glide ratio was incredible.

Really?
It should be approximately the same whether loaded at 1:1 or 4.46:1
Why would you expect it to be otherwise?
quade
http://futurecam.com

[billvon 3,107]

>It should be approximately the same whether loaded at 1:1 or 4.46:1
>Why would you expect it to be otherwise?
Winsor and I were talking about this a while back. With the same canopy and same sized (but heavier) load, the glide ratio should be the same. However, with heavier loads you can often flatten the trim angle and maintain the same cell pressurization due to the higher speed, and changing the trim angle _will_ change the glide. I have no idea if that's what they did here though.
-bill von

[rhino 0]

This was pretty amazing... Now it's a race to the moon!!!!!!!!!
Blue Skies .....

[cobaltdan 0]

-the 25 was 'set' out the door as in a military cargo tandem. it provided just enough drag to aid in stabilization and prevent acceleration above 120 within the first 6 seconds.
-the 170 was a back up main. experimental --> main ---> reserve
-glide ratio is not the same at light to heavy loadings. (some details are proprietary)
sincerely,
dan
atair

[quade 4]

Quote

-glide ratio is not the same at light to heavy loadings. (some details are proprietary)

Some answers are suspected to be B.S. unless backed up with data.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[cobaltdan 0]

quade,
as always, i will gladly back up any statements with recorded data from the loggers. any performance specifications i post on a public forum are not proprietary. much of the technology behind how we are able to design and manufacture wings of this performance is proprietary and will not be discussed.
sincerely,
dan
atair
www.extremefly.com

[quade 4]

Quote

However, with heavier loads you can often flatten the trim angle and maintain the same cell pressurization due to the higher speed, and changing the trim angle _will_ change the glide.

Ok . . . but only to a point and the optimum glide ratio would still be approximately the same for both. Vg will change with weight, but the actual glide ratio certainly should not. With a greater weight, Vg and rate of decent should increase so pressure shouldn't really be an issue.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[billvon 3,107]

>Ok . . . but only to a point and the optimum glide ratio would still be
> approximately the same for both.
While I agree, parachutes are _not_ trimmed for best glide - they are generally trimmed for best openings and best landings. Paragliders, on the other hand, are trimmed close to best glide, and are very different beasts to fly.
-bill von

[freeflycracker 0]

Ran across this in the Interviews section. Interview with Jim Slaton
clipped-
With your team mate Luis Cani flying a 46 sq Ft canopy and talking about trying something smaller, how small do you think we could go? Luigi & me spend a lot of time experimenting with wing loadings and airfoil types. I have seen Luigi load himself up with weights and fly the VX46 at over a 4.7 wing loading!

[ltdiver 3]

Quote

parachutes are _not_ trimmed for best glide - they are generally trimmed for best openings and best landings.

Heard a rumor that the Cobalt canopy, while being fully elliptical, has the bite taken out of it by the trim set keeping the canopy in a shallower glide angle. And that if any front riser input is given, then the more elliptical characterists come out to play. True?
ltdiver
____________________________________________
LightDiverCam

[cobaltdan 0]

i have jumped with luis and seen him load at 3.5. but he would have to wear 60# of weight on the 46 for 4.7/ as far as i know this was not done. to be sure i left message for luis today to verify.
sincerely,
dan

[cobaltdan 0]

hi ltdiver,
there is no trick in the line trim. the stable characteristics of the cobalt are a sum of many design variables. i.e. the choice of an aft loaded airfoil, the planform, etc... if interested more information can be viewed on our web site.
sincerely,
dan
atair
www.extremefly.com

[billvon 3,107]

Hey Dan, I note on your website that you've been advertising higher deployment speeds for the Cobalt. What, exactly, is the maximum deployment speed for the Cobalt? I didn't see it on there anywhere.
-bill von

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, with heavier loads you can often flatten the trim angle and maintain the same cell pressurization due to the higher speed, and changing the trim angle _will_ change the glide.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok . . . but only to a point and the optimum glide ratio would still be approximately the same for both. Vg will change with weight, but the actual glide ratio certainly should not. With a greater weight, Vg and rate of decent should increase so pressure shouldn't really be an issue.

My understanding is that "normal" trim speed is considerably higher than Vg, which would certainly be consistent with the Winsor/Bill von argument expressed by Bill.
Would be interesting to fly a canopy trimmed at Vg. The glide would steepen with any riser input, front or back!

[quade 4]

Quote

Would be interesting to fly a canopy trimmed at Vg. The glide would steepen with any riser input, front or back!

I believe the point of having it (on a "normal canopy") slightly faster than Vg is so that you actually have some sort of option.
quade
http://futurecam.com

[cobaltdan 0]

maximum we have recorded was 256mph, well beyond normal freefly speeds. i was the test jumper under a cobalt 95 loading 2.1. a stunt that would have probably killed me under a different design canopy. definately not recommended under any canopy.
cobalts were designed to reduce the chance of serious injury or death in the event of a premature deployment at freefly terminal velocity speeds(~150-180), as well as during the normally higher deployments speeds practiced in freeflying (~130-140). at boogies we routinely demonstrate intentional deployments in sits & stands, and provide video of high speed deployments in sits, stands and head down.
sincerely,
dan
atair

[quade 4]

Quote

maximum we have recorded was 256mph, . . .

Lesse . . . 256 mph, 199.5 total weight . . . what were the g-forces? Did you measure those? Is that something you can talk about?
quade
http://futurecam.com

[crazy 0]

Quote

maximum we have recorded was 256mph, well beyond normal freefly speeds.

how long did it take between line stretch to fully inflated canopy, slider down? Was it a normal cobalt? Normal slider? Any additional reefing gimmick?
come

[billvon 3,107]

>cobalts were designed to reduce the chance of serious injury or death in the
>event of a premature deployment at freefly terminal velocity speeds(~150-180)
So can I take it that your maximum rated opening speed is 180mph?

[billvon 3,107]

>I believe the point of having it (on a "normal canopy") slightly faster than Vg is
>so that you actually have some sort of option.
I don't think so - certainly a canopy that was unstable in turbulence, landed poorly, and turned slowly would not sell just because it had a better glide (which, BTW, is an almost perfect description of a paraglider.) I think canopy trim is chosen with landings, stability, and opening performance in mind, with a good glide being a nice bonus.
About five years ago I talked to Christian Wehrfritz about essentially jumping paragliders - he remade a few paragliders out of ZP so they could be packed and deployed. The much lower speed caused a lot of problems - just getting the thing fully open without tension knots and the like was difficult. Once open he flew it around like a paraglider and had a great time, but it was nothing like a skydiving canopy.
An interesting experiment - at some point I would like to get a largish Nitron (170ish) and put it on a four-riser setup, such that the trim can be adjusted dynamically. I can then flatten the trim until the canopy starts to misbehave and see what changes. (The Nitron has no cascades, so the line trim is completely adjustable at the risers.)