brokky 4 #26 October 11, 2006 Here are some names of people that had to land in the recent years with a broken or dislocated arm/shoulder: Charles Von Zurich B.J. Worth Kate Cooper Derek Thomas Peter Lawson Vincent Van Laethem. And I am sure there´s many more and many of you know somebody that had a similar problem . Most of the times ,a cut away is just another cut-away,sometimes it´s survival.wuk?? http://www.brunobrokken.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jheadley 0 #27 October 12, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuote The speed cypres will fire at 90+ mph,... Do you think swooping will ever get to a point where one actually is going 90+ during a swoop? 90+ vertical speed =/= 90+ horizontal speed. Even if you go at 120 through the gates, I really hope that your vertical speed is (almost) zero at that moment I understand that, but what I'm saying is that the speed cypres doesn't seem to actually fix the problem. People thought that a person would never go fast enough (have a vertical descent rate of over 78mph below 750 feet) in a hook turn to activate a cypres. Well eventually the sport progressed enough that they did, and someone died. Now they made a new cypres with a slightly higher activation speed. How long is it going to be before that speed is reached during a hook turn and another person dies? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #28 October 12, 2006 Sure it fixes the problem (for now). When people start popping off speed cypresses in turns then I'm sure the problem will be addressed again at that time. A company can spend a lot of time and money trying to engineer a solution to a problem that may not exist, but I'm sure the executive of that company will feel that money and time can be spent better on other things. I'm sure this is why airtech set their limit on the cypres at 78 mph 12-15 years ago. As data logging technology increases in the future I'm sure we will get a much clearer picture of what speeds people are actually reaching, and then airtech can adjust their products accordingly. Untill then don't impact the earth at a high rate of speed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jurgencamps 0 #29 October 12, 2006 QuoteI understand that, but what I'm saying is that the speed cypres doesn't seem to actually fix the problem. People thought that a person would never go fast enough (have a vertical descent rate of over 78mph below 750 feet) in a hook turn to activate a cypres. Well eventually the sport progressed enough that they did, and someone died. Now they made a new cypres with a slightly higher activation speed. How long is it going to be before that speed is reached during a hook turn and another person dies? Other possible solutions: 1. Argus - swoopmode 2. FXC - easy to switch off during each jump 3. No AAD if you are allowed to jump without one 4. ... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frost 1 #30 October 12, 2006 Bruno, thanks for your reply I understand what you're saying... what you describe is a concern to me as well. But isnt everything we do is a trade off for something else? Would you rather have a bigger reserve in case the shoulder is messed up or would you rather have a smaller reserve (similar in size to main) in case you have two canopies out? Either one is a small chance, and i guess we have to weigh in the options, chances and possibilities. I honestly dont know what the best solution would be. I just wanted to see how a reserve loaded at over 2:1 would handle. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #31 October 12, 2006 "I honestly dont know what the best solution would be." Get a JVX all sail and it will pack up really fat. Then you can get a bigger container with a bigger reserve. Then get a speed cypres, and raise your decision altitude. That will help prevent two out. It fixes all of your situations. Bigger reserve, Small fast main, less chance of two out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yardhippie 0 #32 October 12, 2006 Quote"I honestly dont know what the best solution would be." Get a JVX all sail and it will pack up really fat. Then you can get a bigger container with a bigger reserve. Then get a speed cypres, and raise your decision altitude. That will help prevent two out. It fixes all of your situations. Bigger reserve, Small fast main, less chance of two out. dont forget a phat pair of Kagaroos! I know its a bit off subject, but it applies to a couple other threads right now, including this one. I am currently looking at, and researching what my next container will be. Reserve size is one of my major considerations. Im actually planning on not changing my reserve size from what I currently have, thus significantly affecting my container options for my current main.Goddam dirty hippies piss me off! ~GFD "What do I get for closing your rig?" ~ me "Anything you want." ~ female skydiver Mohoso Rodriguez #865 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bob.dino 1 #33 October 12, 2006 As far as I know, Velocity Sports Equipment (manufacturers of the Infinity) can build a container for pretty much any main/reserve combination. KellyF is the owner, and I'm pretty sure JohnMitchell has a large reserve and a small main. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jurgencamps 0 #34 October 13, 2006 Quote ... or would you rather have a smaller reserve (similar in size to main) in case you have two canopies out? I am very interested to see how a velo 107 and a PD113R fly in a side by side or in a biplane configuration? I personnaly don't believe in the small main-small reserve combination in case of a two out situation with modern very high performance mains. Gr Jugen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spizzzarko 0 #35 October 13, 2006 Let me know how that works out for you dude... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jurgencamps 0 #36 October 13, 2006 I don't want to test it, but just to say that I prefer a reserve much bigger than my main. I have a velo 90 and a tempo 150. I don't like the reasoning: small main ==> small reserve. Jurgen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 2 #37 October 15, 2006 QuoteI don't want to test it, but just to say that I prefer a reserve much bigger than my main. I have a velo 90 and a tempo 150. I don't like the reasoning: small main ==> small reserve. I once had a personal downplane (not recommended...) with 2 fairly matched canopies: a Skymaster 230 and a PD253R. They still decided to downplane after flying in a biplane for 1000ft (= a very long time with wingload next to nothing). I don't believe my 2 canopies will play nice together whatever the sizes, I'd have to see it first to believe it again. So I pick my reserve based on what I feel I can land safely, not based on the size of my main. ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jurgencamps 0 #38 October 16, 2006 QuoteQuote So I pick my reserve based on what I feel I can land safely, not based on the size of my main. 100% my idea. Jurgen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 2 of 2 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
