PD Reserves Loaded @ 1.7 or 1.8

[Skydive2 1]

Hi, I currently have a PD 113R which I've never had to jump (knock on wood) Anyway I'm getting ready to order a new container and I am debating between a 106 or a 113R. I'd be loading the 113 @ about 1.7:2 and the 106 @ 1.8:3 and I was wondering if anyone has jump at PD reserve at either of these wingloadings. According to PD's website the maximun weight for both the 113 and the 106 is 220, that's why I'm considering the 106.
Thanks in advance
Lance

[rhino 0]

Demo one....
Blue Skies .....

[Watcher 0]

I had a ride on my 113R at a 1.7:1 wingloading opened so great, landed well, got about a 30-40 foot swoop on it, did not have to front riser it, great canopy. I thought about getting a 106 in my next rig but i dont really need it cause the main is not going to be that big to need the extra room. Never flown the 106, but unless you are getting like a 111 Velocity in there and need the extra room, i would go with the 113, why do you need a smaller reserve than that? Even the smallest containers hold a 113. Just my $.02
Jonathan
D-24876

[skycat 0]

Quote

Even the smallest containers hold a 113

Actually both mirage MZS and the micron 304 or 302 can't remember off the top of my head are made to hold a PD106/MR-109 and are to small for the PD113.

[Watcher 0]

Jonathan

[skycat 0]

no problem, this mirage/RW household will forgive your sunpath household. Now just don't let it happen again
Kelli

[JumpHog 0]

The Reflex R100 also will not fit a PD113R. Only a DM109 or a PD106.

[cobaltdan 0]

i have about 12 reserve rides from test jumping prototypes, half of those are on a pd 113 loaded 1.9. the canopy opens, flies and lands extremefly well.
i have also deliberitly jumped most every brand reverve.
at the wing loading you want to jump, your choices are very slim on reserves that will fly and land well. not to promote a competitor but the pd reserve is a very good choice.
sincerely,
dan

[billvon 3,079]

>According to PD's website the maximun weight for both the 113 and the 106 is
> 220 . . .
That's a weight that it was certified to. It in no way means that the 106 will land you as well as the 113. Personally, I would not jump a reserve that's so heavily loaded that you can wind it up if you deploy while unstable. Seems somewhat foolish for the canopy intended to save your life when all else fails.
-bill von

[cobaltdan 0]

"Personally, I would not jump a reserve that's so heavily loaded that you can wind it up if you deploy while unstable. "
thats one of the reasons i do not agree with you about using an rsl. in the case of sub 100 mains canopies i am firmly against. deploying your reserve in a flat spin is relatively stable and not that big a danger, but many times your body and/or your canopy will also be rotating axially to your lines, in addition to the overall diving spin.
sincerely,
dan

[SkymonkeyONE 4]

Quote

thats one of the reasons i do not agree with you about using an rsl. in the case of sub 100 mains canopies i am firmly against.

Agreed, but that is another endless thread already...
My webpage HERE

[billvon 3,079]

>thats one of the reasons i do not agree with you about using an rsl. in the case of
> sub 100 mains canopies i am firmly against. deploying your reserve in a flat spin
> is relatively stable and not that big a danger, but many times your body and/or
> your canopy will also be rotating axially to your lines, in addition to the overall
> diving spin.
I agree that an RSL is not always a good idea. However, removing the RSL to prevent line twists on your reserve (so you can jump a much smaller reserve) seems like a somewhat backwards process. I think it is a mistake to begin with to choose a reserve that is vulnerable to line-twist induced malfunctions. You should choose a reserve that will save your life under most conditions, and choosing one that absolutely requires you to be stable when you deploy it isn't a good idea.
-bill von

[rhino 0]

I have a 109 as a main and a pd143 reserve. I will not go any smaller.. The only thing that has me thinking twice about that is the test jumps that hook made with a small main and a big reserve.. So I might goto a 126 but no smaller. Why would anyone want a small ass reserve?
Blue Skies .....

[SkymonkeyONE 4]

Well, one reason is that people who only weigh a buck and a half don't need anything any bigger than the smallest reserve. Personally, I own two Tempo 120's. I have them because they were small enough to fit in the very-smallest Javelin and economical. It landed me plenty safe two weeks ago, so I am not sweating it.
Chuck
My webpage HERE

[dayle 0]

I agree with you, I don't know why anyone would want such a lhigh loading on a reserve. When I think about landing my canopy I think about worst case senarios. Downwind and off the DZ, what if you are hurt?? Couldn't be much fun landing a highly loaded reserve with a broken arm or some other injury. I make due with the larger pack volume thank you very much.
Dayle
I'm just a newbie so take it for what it's worth.

[rhino 0]

You know what I mean.. lol
I just think worst case.. Let's use Texas for example, Spaceland.. Just a couple of miles down the road there is an alligator viewing area. If you have a 15 foot piece of safe, fenced in grass can you hitt and stop safely with your current reserve? If you don't hit this spot you are LUNCH. I can hit it with my 143??
Rhino
Blue Skies .....

[cobaltdan 0]

bill ,
i understand your point but i'm not sure in the case of a violently twisting mal/reserve deployment there would be much difference between my 110 and the next size or 2 up. i prefer not to use an rsl and keep a slightly higher hard deck. i pull a little high @ 3-3.5k as do i believe most jumpers choosing to fly high performance mains.
also keep in mind that for some of us jumping 'high loaded reserves' they are still boats compared to our mains (being about 20% bigger or more). i have no issues landing my reserve into backyards, downwind, etc... i do not believe i am accepting any additional risk by jumping my choice of reserve, except potentially in the case of an unconsious ride.
with that as a calculated risk i choose to jump a atair 110 and pd 113 reserve loaded about 1.9.
i do think there are some missconceptions about the handleing characteristics of reserves as some models fly like crap and most people fly them for the first time under a cutaway situation.
sincerely,
dan

[billvon 3,079]

>i understand your point but i'm not sure in the case of a violently twisting
> mal/reserve deployment there would be much difference between my 110 and
> the next size or 2 up.
I think there would be a huge difference, similar to the difference under any other canopies that were 2 sizes apart. For example, there's a huge difference between a Stiletto 107 and 135 at my loadings when it comes to which you have to chop from line twists.
I don't believe in the "Well, if X is OK for me to jump, what's the big deal to go one size down?" philosophy. I think there _is_ a minimum size, based on someone's skills, expected currency, landing area etc and this goes for mains as well as reserves.
>i prefer not to use an rsl and keep a slightly higher hard deck. i pull a little high
> @ 3-3.5k as do i believe most jumpers choosing to fly high performance mains.
That's fine - everything you do has to be factored into your gear selections. If you up your breakoff and pull altitudes, you have more time to deal with problems and can deal with more violent mals. You have to be religious about it though. You can't just claim that you will always pull at 4 (for example) except when you're at boogies where that's dangerous, if your friends want to break at 3, if you want to do 4-way . . . the laws of physics are not swayed by good intentions, as much as some people I've jumped with would like them to be.
>i do not believe i am accepting any additional risk by jumping my choice of
> reserve, except potentially in the case of an unconsious ride.
I think that's incorrect. Smaller canopies are simply more risky to land - you have more energy that your body must absorb even when you've slowed it down as much as possible. I think it may well be true that the additional risk is acceptable to you, which is fine - we all make that tradeoff. But to claim that an arbitrarily small reserve is just as safe as a larger one doesn't make much sense, even if it is bigger than your main.
>i do think there are some missconceptions about the handleing characteristics of
> reserves as some models fly like crap and most people fly them for the first time
> under a cutaway situation.
Well, but please keep in mind that this is where people use them! Jumping demo reserves is a great idea, and I highly recommend it, but when you finally really need your reserve, it will not be deployed under controlled and planned conditions, like the demo canopy was. Smallest reserve canopy I've jumped so far is a PD113, loaded about 1.8 to 1. Could I land it? Yes - it landed like a similar sized triathalon with a wimpier flare. Could I land it at Lost Prairie with no wind in bushes, and not break anything? Not 5 times out of 5.
-bill von