cobaltdan

hey craig, cool stuff. i'd like to show you what we are doing. check out www.extremefly.com click aerospace then look at the datalogger & software section and also the gps guided parachute section. we am looking for another programmer to join our team. give a call when you get the chance. sincerely, dan atair 718-923-1709

hi jason, there are several variables that effect the opening sequence of a cobalt. for example after stage 1 if you put pressure on the rear risers you can abort the pause betwen the stages and cause a snappy second stage. it is important to read the instruction sheet before you jump them. when you get the chance go to our web site and read the faq page as well as the 2 stage opening page. then let me know if you still have any problems. sincerely, dan atair www.extremefly.com

if you like the viper you will love the cobalt. simply many years of refinement. sincerely, dan atair

the week after the ranch will be a kicking swoop meet at sky's the limit, in newton nj. dan

red from flight concepts told me he built an airlocked 135 crew canopy a few years ago... -dan

hey brian, welcome to the thread ! i have read about and seen paraglider designs where the nose was fully formed. some as you said were less than sucessful. a version with a succesfull fully formed nose was designed by michael nesler who has worked for atair for about 3 years. he holds 2 european patents on canopy air locks., to his credit he designed the edel, perche, up europe, eiffel and bicla companies paragliders. i do believe that the information learned on these paraglider designs is directly applicable to skydive canopy design. the canopies i compared was a cobalt 105 with vertical airlocks applied as per r.payne's patent they were made a little over a year ago. differences noticed were increased rigidity of nose, but not decreased spanwise distortion,the canopy did not prove to be more efficient, i.e. did not out glide or out flare the non airlocked. as i said i think valves are one more option in a designers bag and should be explored, again i thing you make great wings, but i do not believe valves will save you in a situation that would collapse another modern high performance canopy. i would love to see you do any kind of a study to quantify those claims. why not simply do tests using a 'rolling test rig', i could be very interesting and fun. sincerely, dan ps. you mention that airlocks cross brace the nose of the canopy. i agree that they are sewn cross bias but the function of a cross brace is simply to reduce spanwise distortion. from looking at some advertising photo's of your airlocked canopies it looks like the nonloaded ribs float up just as high as with a non airlocked 9 cell, showing that the valves are not an efective x bace in this design... pps. dont take this conversation as adversarial, because its not. through discussion i simply hope to spark ideas for both of to make future canopies.

alan, all good inventors/engineers begin with complete background research. paraglider research is most definately meaningful when applied to skydiving design. your point/my point on apples to apples is taken and why even after reading the background research i still built an airlocked canopy. this was a little over a year ago and the airlocks were from a patent that was offered for licence to us. i got the chance to fly a cobalt with and without airlocks. a canopy's performance is the sum of all its design variables. i view airlocks a one more design variable a designer has, using them has positive and negative traits to balance, as with most things. if you buy an airlocked canopy do so because you like the way it flies, not because you think it will save you in a turbulent condition. if such a condition is enough to collapse a modern high performance non airlocked canopy, definately it will take out the airlocked canopy as well. sincerely, dan

with micro lines it is important to always use stows intended for microlines, i.e. small bands. using large bands may make your packer happy but it will make for harder openings....its your neck, use small band and double stow. sincerely, dan

d.weid., yes i would have to agree with you that airlocks can add rigidity by increasing internal pressure when deflecting the brakes, but note that it is the nose, i.e. the upper curve of the airfoil from the leading edge of the topskin back to the hump of the airfoil, that is most important. current commercialized airlock designs sweep back from the leading edge of the bottom skin to seal on the top skin some distance back. the 'nose' really isn't airlocked. some prototype paraglider designs got arround this problem by placing the airlocks on the bottom skin and having a fully formed nose. sincerely, dan

note: many people on this forum jump cobalts at high loadings sometimes giving a false impression that the canopies are for turf surfers only. cobalt canopies have a wide loading range and like their predecessor the space have an trully excellent track record as begineer canopies loaded under 1.4. if you are demoing a sabre 2, hornet or safire, a cobalt should definately be on your list to try. the cobalt has staged openings making it safer at higher speeds, and has a better glide/flare. it is not a faster than the sabre, hornet or safire. sincerely, dan

last summer jari qualified me as a wing suit instructor. the first 'student' i took up scared me completely. first, because of what he did in the air, but then doubly so because when i located him on the ground (i was expecting him to be dead) he was completely unaware that anything what so ever was wrong. i think the recommended jump numbers are not etched in stone but are a very good guide line to ensure that wingsuit flyers will have a large enough window of perception to absorb and deal with all the added information going on. be safe. sincerely, dan

i am not slamming anyone, read the post again. -dan

paul martin (jyro) designer of icarus canopies told me on record that all icarus canopies use a stilletto airfoil. its no big deal. in fact so many canopy companies use this airfoil it is simply refered to by designers as the pd airfoil. sincerely, dan

airlocks were first tried on paragliders almost 20 years ago. i have a stack of scientific papers on the subject about 1' high. in 20 years not one single airlocked paraglider has been comercialized. this in an industry that universially adopts improvements far too small for us to care in skidiving. note that the paragliding industry has more r&d money and technology than you can imagine when compared to skydiving industry canopy design. airlocks sound good to a laymen, but not necessarily to an aerodynamicist. btw, i am not saying that some airlocked canopies aren't nice flying machines. just that the superior in turbulence thing is false and unproven. now to all the people than may chime in and say well my samuri is much better in turbulence than my triathon, etc... you must understand that just because my wing does not deflate does not mean i am flying, and you must compare apples to apples. i.e. the same canopy with and without airlocks (i have done this. the airlocked canopy vs the non airlocked canopy is more rigid when brakes are applied, but performance is equal. all literature i have read from the paragliding industry agrees, and many point out decreased performance) there are several patents on airlocks for skydiving canopies. brian g is the only one comercializing designs. i think he is a great canopy designer, i am not trying to put down his work, he makes some nice wings. i just want people to understand why other canopy manufacturers are not making airlocked canopies. sincerely, dan

alpha and space were identical except for name. the line attachment points were not different. sincerely, dan

airfoil and line trim primarily determine riser pressure. to a smaller degree planform. sincerely, dan atair -

i could be wrong, but i think greg yarbonet may have designed that canopy...? -dan

yes the end cells are usually closed on the tandem for a bit. through elements of the canopy design we control the conductance of air into the cells. they inflate after several seconds of flight. we designed this canopy after surveying many tandem masters. their basic wish list for a new tandem was: -soft openings, soft openings, and soft openings -end cell closure is good (softer opening) -light toggle pressure -excellent flare and glide -easy to pack (no special tricks & non slip fabric) -responsive turns, but without loosing too much altitude on a cobalt main, end cell closures on both sides is only common at light loadings. end cell closure on one side is common if you are asymetrical in the harness during deployment. in either case they come right out if you do a slow flare. sincerely, dan

hi paul, thanks for good feedback. ------ btw, i almost never check this forum, just the gear/swoop ones. lines sets: heather faxes or emails an excel spead sheet with full line specs to anyone that asks. if your rigger has had trouble getting specs i am willing to bet it is because he never asked for them from us. we also stock a pretty good range of line sets for our alpha, viper, space and cobalt canopies, for immediate shiping. sincerely, dan atair www.extremefly.com 718-923-1709 ph 178-923-1733 fx

about the 190. i have not made the patterns for a c 190, if it was listed by us it must have been a typo. 1.2 is our recommended point for begineers. i.e. if you are 1.0 on a sabre we recommend 1.2 on a cobalt for an apples to apples comparison. this is because the cobalt wing is more efficient, it generates more lift and is slower in foward speed. instead of playing the game of calling a 159 a 170, we call them what they are and suggest they be loaded a hair more. sincerely, dan ps i would make a new size if at least several people were interested.

no, we do not want to run a demo program. the canopies are $3100 and as a introduction for the first 50 canopies we are offering 2 for $5000. money back guarantee if it isn't the best tandem you ever jumped. not sure how long the offer will last, we sold 12 today. sincerely, dan

i do not have any ground video, but will put some up soon. oh, about the puking students, no, i told chuck to treat the jumps as a test jump and put the canopy through all paces. he and simon flew it hard ! if anyone has questions about the tandems give us a call or as a reference give larry pennington a call at skydive suffolk (757-539-3531). he is a no bs stand up guy and said he wouldn't mind us refering people to him. he is flying several of our tandems at his operation. btw as an introduction we are offering a price special on our tandems now. sincerely, dan atair

quick note on line dump: too many jumpers use large bands with modern micro line canopies. this is a poor practice. small bands are intended for use with micro lines. your packer may not like the small bands, but its your neck. sincerely, dan atair

we just got the belly cam footage of our tandem posted at www.extremefly.com sincerely, dan atair

also note a more efficient wing will 'fly bigger' than a less efficient wing of the same area. there are canopies that fly big and are spot on for area measurement. sincerely, dan atair