relyon

I'd land my main on rear risers. I often land that way as it is. Bob

Not too many women do CReW but the ones that do are pretty cool. Bob

Here is a pic of rapide (hard) links with soft bumpers. Bob

The formula I referenced is not linear w/respect to canopy size. It's linear to the square root of the ratio of wing loadings. My example was for the same person under the same canopy at different loadings. The only assumption was that the drag coefficient of the jumper's body is constant as their weight (and therefore wing loading) changes. That's a reasonable assumption over the range of loadings discussed. If the jumper is Harry Steel and varying amounts ballast are used to adjust loading, the drag actually will be constant. In that case the velocity/loading relationship will hold up to the point the load (low or high) deforms the canopy such that it's aerodynamic characteristics change. For 7-cells, I'll guess that's somewhere between .6 and 2.2. At loadings of 3.0 - 5.0, a non-crossbraced canopy is probably going to collapse; there's simply not enough spreading force to keep it open. Having 3 times the area means having the dimensions (span/chord/etc) proportional to the sq root of 3, so the 210 sq ft canopy will be a little over 1.7 times as big as a 70 sq ft canopy of the same design. Bob

It can be looked at the same, but that doesn't mean it is standard practice (it's not). I read engineering texts and periodicals all the time. Nowhere that I'm aware of in standard aerospace industry practice is wing loading ever referred to using x:y format where y is always 1. The same material usually leaves out the x (times) in F=ma, even though that is technically correct too. By the same token, speed limits (or airspeeds, for that matter) are a ratio. Yet no one sez "Damn. I got pulled over this morning for doing 73:1 in 60:1 zone!" or "the power off stall speed of this aircraft is 43:1". Again, a matter of accepted convention. Bob (who sometimes jumps a Lightning 126 loaded at 31:20 aka 1.55)

With the same canopy and jumper, the ratio of freestream flight velocity will be proportional to the square root of the ratio of wing loadings. Compared to a wingloading of 1.0, a canopy loaded at 1.3 (NOT 1.3:1 as is so often incorrectly notated) will be (1.3/1.0)**0.5 = 1.14 times faster. That means if a Hornet 150 @ 1.0 flies at 40 kts, the same canopy will fly at 45.6 kts @ 1.3. Bob

Ok, here's a few pics of dive blocks. 1) Type XVII risers with front and rear blocks, no Vetwrap 2) Type VIII risers with front and rear blocks, Vetwrap'd 3) Same as 2) with the container closed to show the bulk. Bob

I use front and rear blocks exclusively - no loops. All the pros and cons have been discussed here and are pretty straight forward. I'll take a few pics of my setup and post them. Bob

I jump a Lightning 126 or 143 main and a Tempo 170 reserve. By the time I see it (6 jumps so far) I'm happy it's relatively big and docile. Bob

Doing CRW one tends to land out regularly. I keep a pullup cord with me all the times and carry a cell phone on night jumps. Stay with the group if at all possible when landing out. Bob

I'll politely disagree. With the possible exception of Rusty Vest at PD (and another who is no longer in the business), I've found most canopy manufacturers (yes, those that make CRW canopies) know very little about CRW. There are plenty of posters right here who have significant CRW experience (including national/world competitors and world record holders) and can suggest canopies to fit the desired application. I have ~250 jumps on a Triathlon 160 and will vouch for it's ability to do very acceptable "lite" CRW. Aside from a little less robust nose construction than I'd like (relative to a Lightning - just means avoiding really hard docks/grips), the hybrid Triathlon is great for mixed freefall/CRW use. I would avoid 9 cells and ellipticals because their higher aspect ratios make them turn (and wrap) faster. Keeping in mind that Tris are non-crossbraced low aspect 7 cells, I'd also avoid loading higher than ~1.3, at least initially. Bob

Depends what you mean by high pullers. CRW almost always gets out first. Bob

It's not the 1" of riser pull that does it, it's a chordwise flatter canopy. A 1" vertical deflection 12" above the 3-rings requires 5" of horizontal deflection. That effectively flattens the canopy similar to having a longer lineset, and that increases the recovery arc. The problem with this method is dimished control relative to front risering (not known for having a lot of control to begin with) and the potential for surge when transitioning to rear controls. Bob

I've attached chart I got from Rusty Vesty that illustrates how to measure PD canopy line lengths. (I had to shrink it by 50% and save it at 85 percent JPG quality in order to upload it.) Bob

On my 62nd jump, three of us (all sub-100 jump wonders) decided to open at 7500' and see if we could get close to one another under canopy. I not only got close, but actually touched ends cells and pilot chutes with my feet. After getting down we decided to get some CRW coaching since none of us knew what we were doing. My first real CRW dive was on jump 87. Bob

Hey CRW dogs, It's been a while since there's been a CRW boogie out this way and it's about time there was. Mark your calendar for the Northwest Diamond Jamboree to be held August 15, 16, and 17, 2003 at Kapowsin Air Sports in Kapowsin, WA. The event will be open to licensed jumpers of all CRW experience levels, with loads and dives chosen to keep everyone challenged. The purpose of this boogie is having fun doing CRW in the northwest, seeing old friends, and making some new ones. With the help of my fellow CRW dogs and KAS, I'm sure we can make that happen. There is no registration fee so we can spend the money on jumps instead. Though I won't make any guarantees about the weather, mid-August in the northwest is usually quite beautiful. Kapowsin is in the foothills north of Mt Rainier, which provides a great backdrop. If you've been here, you know what I mean; if not, you're in for a treat. In addition to the skydives, Kapowsin will be holding their annual Lobster Feed party Friday evening (roughly $25/person prepaid to the DZ at least a week in advance) and the local CRW dogs will be hosting a potluck/chip-in BBQ at the DZ Saturday night. Everyone is welcome at both parties. For those flying in, Seattle-Tacoma International (SEA) should be your destination airport. I'm gathering and will provide more specific details (directions, lodging, food) in a later update. Bob

I don't know what the statistics are, but I have seen all three. Only one was an opening chop (both center A lines broken due to a hard opening) and I'll guess those are pretty rare in general. Entanglements and wraps are by far the most common - I've had 7 cutaways, all in that category. Other reasons include damage from entanglements/wraps (hook knife, tears, broken lines), rigging, and even one PC in tow (bridle hitched on the pin). As far as risk, that's really hard to put a finger on. At least three of mine could be called aggressive flying, but I was doing 8-way speed at the time. Another three were just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. One was what I'd call an experienced skydiver making a freshly stupid mistake. Bob

CReW can be a bit aggressive at times. My favorites are: Red Hot Chili Peppers Get On Top ("...hit me, come git me...") Korn Freak On A Leash ("...somethings got a hold on me"...) Rob Zombie Dragula ("...strangling the breeze...")Bob

I wholeheartedly agree. A friend of mine had a similar adventure. He didn't get hurt, but the gear fear was pretty high for the first 5-10 jumps on his new gear. Bob

I love being under canopy and these days do nothing but CReW. Bob

True, but that is a Acrobat conversion of the PostScript conversion of the original LaTeX document. IMO, it looks like a photcopy of a photocopy or a fax of a fax compared to the original. Rich's Word conversion is brand new and looks much cleaner. Thanks Rich! Bob

My sentiments exactly. Bob

I have no idea what you're referring to. Your post mentioned the difficulty of catching a floating CRW newbie. I replied with valid suggestions of how to correct the stated problem. It's your rhetoric that's distracting. Bob

Oops - introduced a random term - my bad. Wetware refers the jumpers brain. Adding a Rapide link to the front or rear risers is a common way of changing the trim slightly to compensate for minor float differences. Adding a link to the front decreases the trim (increasing float and decreasing drive slightly); adding a link to the rear increases the trim (decreasing float and increasing drive slighty). Adding links is not a long term fix but it can make things a bit easier on any given day, other things being equal. New Lightnings generally float a little until the knots are set. Adding links to the rear risers is a common way of adjusting until they've got 20-30 jumps. I keep a pair of #5s and #6s with me for just this purpose. Bob (edited for grammar and to add "slightly")

Any competent CRW coach should be able to analyze the problem in a couple jumps and recommend hardware and/or wetware changes to correct it. Links and sashays come to mind. Bob