teason

OK, I think I'm piecing this together now (wow! I'm really enjoying this thread!) All jumpers with the same exit weight will produce the same amount of lift even if one jumps a Manta and the other jumpes a 58 Xaos 27. That is because lift = weight. That means lift has nothing to do with which jumper lands first. Could it be the speed at which the lift is obtained? Does the braked canopy produce lift at a slower speed than the unbraked canopy? If so, then the braked canopy will land last having acheived lift = weight at a slower decent. Am I getting closer or did I just leave the rails? I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

Was that what I said? I didn't think that's what I said I think I said that lift is 90 degrees to glide angle or angle of attack (no matter what that angle is). Then I postulated that a flatter more horizontal glide would produce lift in a direction that was more verticle. I then lept to the conclusion (in my basic rudementry way) that the lift was more usable for keeping the canopy up as it would be more verticle. I wanted to know if that conclusion was off or not. and I think pilotdave answered that one for me

Point taken well taken. I guess I'm focusing of my flare speeches where you have lots of forward speed when you hit the flare. Once the speed reduces, you go back to the same lift. Lets try another angle (pun intended) Lift is constant but is the direction of the lift is not. A plane in a nose dive is producing the same amount of lift as a plane in level flight. The problem is that lift is produced 90 degrees to glide angle. The lift is not being used to keep the plane up. However, if the glide angle is changed to be closer to the horizontal, the lift becomes closer to the verticle. I think that mean that the wing has more usable lift. Am I getting close? I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

As long as you practice your procedures as part of every skydive, it'll be a nonissue. My last mal was after a very low pull, I had a streamer. I've practiced that scenario in the plane and with my FJs soooooooo many times that I was doing US CDN currency conversions to figure out my repack cost in Eloy during the whole procedure. I reacted without having to think or, worse yet, second guess. My muscle memory took care of the rest! Practice AND visualize. I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

I think the theory you citing is that a canopy in half brakes produces more lift at a cost of more drag. It would depend a great deal on how the canopy is trimmed and how far the tail is pulled down in that jumper's half mode. (I've jumped canopies that nearly stalled at my half brake point because of poorly set brake lines) But fine points aside, Canopy A is capable of producing more lift. As you pull your toggles down, The shape of your canopy changes. Air is moving faster over the canopy relative to under it. To oversimplify; the greater difference in air speed means lower air pressure on top and therefore creates the greater lift. The canopy also produces more drag which in turn slows the forward speed reducing lift. There is a point where the canopy produces greater lift for the drag produced. Go beyond that point and the increased drag reduces the wing's efficiency. It's like a pilot flying with flaps! As for angle of attack, I don't believe it changes because you are not affecting the length of you A,B,C and D lines. I think that this is a symantic thing. Your glide slope is what is affected. ... I think... I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

Does the gear you were jumping have main lift web adjusters? Maybe an better question would be "was the chest strap in your throat?" Our student gear often has two main lift web adjustments, one on each side. Many times this adjustment is erroneously stretched out on larger jumpers. The adjuster is for torso length and not overall size. If it is extended too much, the leg strap will be hanging too low. The strap then tightens horizontally around the leg but on opening it shifts to about a 45 degree angle and pinches the leg. The whole harness rides up and you'll notice the chest strap is quite high on your body. If this sounds familiar, don't worry about new gear. It will be sized for your particular frame. In the meantime, ask your DZ rigger how to adjust the MLW. I've seen some Instructors with years of experience without a clue.

I feel your pain ... and my own when I'm bringing in the chub-chubs without wind! I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

Stalled a big ol' fat Manta yesterday during some instructor traing. Man, they really vibrate with only five inflated cells!

Had a pilot negative g me up for a toe hang once. Not a good idea from 3000' grand, you lose to much altitude. Released low, had a funky opening. Was in the middle of peeling velcro when it decided to fly straight with line twists up the ying yang! In the saddle at 1250' . I never let the pilot compensate for my poor technique again! I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

I agree! You're head down on the slide and you fell that gentle tugging pulling you forward. By the way, my favorite hop'n'pop position from a cessna is hanging upside down from the step by my legs. Pilot gets all weird about "brake lines" and stuff. Fun!

This has bugged me for some time. Why was it unacceptable to jump an extremely overloaded f111 7 cells in the late 80s and early 90s and now it's done on a regular basis? I came into the sport when Zero-p fabric was being introduced and only a few people knew what spectra was (it was vaguely termed microline back then). PD had a max weight on their Sabre 170 at 187lbs out the door. Porosity was no longer the issue it once was and wing loadings became higher becuase of it. I may be wrong but I believe people didn't overload f111 canopies because of their flight characteristics and limitations of the fabric. After a few jumps f111 got more porous and geometric porosity was always a factor. New designs and planforms allowed us, and sometimes required us, to greatly overload our canopies to a level that would have seemed like suicide 10-12 years ago. So now here we are. We see nothing wrong with jumping overloaded HP eliptical ZP canopies. Of course when you have a mal, you're going back to the 7 cell f111 canopies of yester year. Yes I do know the new f111 has a cfm of 0-3 and designs are tweaked, but the designs, planforms and materials are still not the same as HP elliptical mains. They are subject to geometric porosity and have not had the same changes that allow us to overload. For some reason we think it's OK to fly apples like oranges. Besides, when it all hits the fan and you're broken after a canopy collision or some other painful experience, do you really want to come in hot? Any canopy designers out there who can correct me? Please do so, I have not been prevy to the reserve design process/considerations and I'm just going by what I've seen in my limited perspective. I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

It can really depend on who owns the plane and how the billing is done. Some DZ who own their own planes have total control over pricing. At our DZ, we pay a set amount for a set altitude. If 3 get out at 3000' and 1 gets out at 9000' we're charge the same as 4 at 9000'. Just the way it is ... Maybe next contract ... I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

Hmm ... On exit, hand your instructor a cutaway (breakaway) handle. On an IAD hanging exit let go with your left hand and grab the PC bridle then release with your right and fall away. (we used to do that in training to teach new JM's to expect anything) To freak out other students on AFF, have the instructors grab you by the grips and pitch you out if it's a rear exit. Seeing as we're talking about skydiving practical jokes here's one a freind of mine told me: Years ago, he was doing radio for some FJs. When the plane was at the end of the runway, the FJs got out of the 206 and 6 experienced jumpers boarded with a bag of flour. At altitude, the dumped the flour to simulate an engine faliure and all bailed, 3 had round mains to make him think they'd pulled their reserve, the other 3 opened squares and either held them in stalls or spiraled rapidly. He was freaking out watching these "students" landing reserves and flying crazy! He figured it out when the first guy landed next to him but man was he pissed! Be careful who you do this stuff to, they didn't call him "Big Jim" for nothin'! I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

It's was his most embarasing moment in our highschool year book! I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

Loved it as a kid! Ah the memories... the nasty speedo wrestling shorts, the out of shape "Legends" Still have an autograph from Angelo "King Kong" Mosca. A guy I knew in school was big into wrestling, his name was Chris. My buddy Paul beat him one day in Highschool. Chris became Chris Jericho. Paul became a hairdresser. Actually cuts my hair! I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

Just did some reading, it does break at the shoulder. My mistake. For some reason, I thought it broke where it goes through itself. I wonder what the hell I was thinking of? I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

Had a of canopy that needed new brake lines last year. Grabbed my scissors, microline and fid. Did it right on site at the DZ with very little down time. Also changed the inboard brake lines on a canopy last week. Once again it was done in minutes, very little down time. I think there is negligable strength loss(6% sounds familiar but I'm not sure) as it doesnot break at the shoulder. Maybe Sid or Nightjumper can answer that one.

That's an exellent point. The certification is just a springboard into rigging. It's where rigging begins. What determins a good rigger is where he goes from there, not who gave him the paperwork. As for the guy who made the comment, he's a really decent guys who was just telling me what a Rigger "B" told him. There was no malicious intent on his part. That's kinda what got my goat. I don't blame the jumper for being misinformed but when it may have come from a Rigger "B" ... We should all be on the same page and share a proffesional courtesy. I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

I'm trying to think up more Spidey references but I'm so tried ... must ... sleep... want ... sleep ... NO! Must... Not ... Lose... Conciousness... I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

Sorry. As I said before, I tend to be overly sensitive. Over the past while I've heard comment about Canadian FAA riggers and want to know if it's isolated or not. Could be I'm making a mountain out of a mole hill but better I know than just assume. I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

Absolutely false. Canadian Aviation Regulation 623.38 E) Parachute Packing Requirements FAA riggers are recognized by TC. This reminds me of the time I was told my USPA D license was worthless 'cause they're so easy to get! I also had a friend who went down to the US and was told that they wouldn't recognize a CSPA riggers pack job. It's going both ways! The CSPA rigger cert. is worth getting for the defense fund and to be on the same page as to what is standardized across the board. But to imply incompetence was what really got my goat. Now the only non TSO'd gear I do these days is glider reserves. I don't seal 'em and I don't certify 'em. I just ensure that maintenance and inspections are being done correctly. So It's a moot point about non TSO'd gear. It is the atitude some have towards FAA riggers in canada that is bothering me. Some of us haven't had the oppurtunity to attend a Rigger "A" course. Some of us studied our asses off, went down to gear manufacturers and spent weeks learning about gear from that people how make it. We learned from some of the legends in parachute equipment. We learned from some of the best. Then we come back and have people think we're lesser riggers. I take a great deal of pride in my rigging. I never pack without an open manual. I always encourage the owner to watch and learn about inspections and gear and I never get "creative". Have others experienced this attitude? Is it common or am I just getting worked up for nothing. I tend to be overly sensitive I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

The other day, a visting jumper told me that an FAA senior rigger is not allowed to assemble gear but a CSPA rigger "A" is! This comment comes a couple of months after I read in Canpara that FAA riggers in Canada lack the training and knowledge required to pack Canadian gear! The article also states that an FAA rigger could lose his ticket if he packs Canadian non TSO'd equipment in Canada. What the f**k is going on here? Does Canadian gear use different webbing, thread, nylon? Does Canadian gear not come with manuals (we must have them to pack any gear) Can someone clarify what the hell's going on! According to Transport Canada the two tickets are recognized, why the persecution or am I the one who's clueless? I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

I don't know but you should check out my new elliptical Volplane! I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

I'm talking about a 12000J. They're safe as long as you respect the warning lable that reads "main canopy activation must at least 1500' above the set altitude" A friend of mine decided to turn his off on the advice of other jumpers and instructors. He hit the runway at line stretch. But let's not talk about AADs, that's another forum and that accident was a long time ago. I brought up a paralell with licenses earlier. Just like the current A-D licenses, it could set a path of goals for jumpers to follow. Jumpers at DZs with less adequate canopy coaching would progress at a rate consistant with the training they are recieving. Absolutely right! The CSPA has a skills grid for jumper progression. It has different goals and stages to work through. It is so difficult to read that I have never ever seen a coach or instructor use it. At my DZ, I had to create my own skills grid in an easy to read format complete with color codes just to get my coaches to use it. A grid that isn't used is a waste of paper. I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

Hey that's simple, he didn't want to really hurt Doc Ock becuase he realized he was under the influence of the arms. Now where's my no-prize!? By the way, what was with him losing his mask every second scene? I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.