dploi

What conditions would you consider ideal for jumping an A of this height? Thanks in advance. Fast (not too fast) and at your back (bisecting the 120° in front of you), of course. 350' is just fine for a short delay and a turn into the wind. I do it from 330' fairly often.

As far as I know, that's a guaranteed brake fire slider down/off. "LRT" means "Line, ring, toggle". The loop goes through the line, then the ring, and then the toggle goes throughthe loop. The three letters are in alphabetical order. When you're new, you might remember "RLT" or something. I've heard "RLT" from some people's mouths and have seen "RLT" get jumped twice (both brakes fired both times). The riser adjustments of which you speak doubtfully made any difference in the brake fire. Glad it didn't kill you. So your left brake was still stowed, and stowed incorrectly, after opening? I guess with a very small delay, that stow might be able to hold.

Think less. Jump more. Oh, wait... you are. Good work.

There is a TARDover (aka McTARDy) near the end of this video: http://www.skydivingmovies.com/ver2/pafiledb.php?action=file&id=1619 It happens up in the top left of the screen, at the same time as a freefall assist (chain).

If your parachute did not open after jumping from said object, and you only broke your legs, this article would be about a miracle, not a mishap.

Nike. I would never put my adidas through that kind of punishment. ;)

Well ... thanks! I guess *smile* PerFlare HAHAHAHAHA!!! I don't know how many people got that...

Read this. It starts as a comparison against the Velocity, but then gets more i- depth, and then off-topic, and then back on. http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1720662;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread

I still consider canopy-out exits to be BASE jumps. If the canopy is over your head and at least partially inflated at the launch point, it's a foot launch, and not a BASE jump. If you've performed a TARD, rollover, etc, then you know that it's a BASE jump. Your canopy isn't flying yet. If your canopy can't save your life at the launch point, and a it is freefall that gets it flying over your head, then I say it's a BASE jump. Even a TARD takes so long to inflate that the fall would otherwise result in death or serious injury. In other words -- freefall with less than linestretch over your head -- I log as a BASE jump.

Think less. Jump more.

Good call, Nick: http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1668803#1668803

400 openings on my Katana. Line twists a few times that have either flown straight or were easy to correct. Some body position related dives here and there and one brake fire that was fixed and flying straight in one revolution. I never chopped my Katana, and almost every jump on that canopy is in a Skyflyer 3. And I pack WAY sloppy, every time. Even my BASE packjobs are sloppy (it's all body position). In terms of staging, I found the two to be almost the same. Low snatch force, and a long snivel. It's different for the last part, though. On the Crossfire 2, the last part of inflation is very slow. At the end of the snivel, the end cells slowly creep open and the slider slowly creeps down the last two feet. The Kaana opens almost the same way, but at the end of the snivel, the end cells pop open and the slider is all the way down. I prefer the latter, actually, but it's all just one's opinion. I think more people than not label a long opening as a good opening, which is just fine. I prefer a "long enough" opening. I'd most definitely readily jump either canopy with a lot of weight on my head without worrying about getting whiplashed. But I wouldn't say that the opening is "sacrificed". If it is, it is not anywhere near giving a "bad" opening. I'm not a manufacturer groupie. I give as many canopies as I can the old college try before I buy. The deal with PD, though, is that their high performance canopies just fly very differently than what else is out there. We can go on and on about the way this is trimmed or this is cut, or how this opens, or how far we swooped what, but the fact of the matter is that the flying experience is DRASTICALLY different. The most FUN I've had flying is with the Katana and the Velocity. That's what really matters. I guess what we're trying to resolve here as that your claim that the Crossfire 2 and the Katana are the same does not pertain the way the canopy feels. Can we agree on that?

Riiiiight. (Cough) Body position (Cough). ;)

Do a hop and pop from said bridge with a normal packjob. Before popping toggles, kick yourself into half a twist and observe. That's about where you're gonna get em.

All perspective, I guess. Inches of fabric here and there make for two very different flight experiences.

Just because you end up with a 250' swoop on two different canopies doesn't make them "identical". This is not a good benchmark. A pilot might have a flying style that warrants the same distance swoop under any comparable canopy. I didn't get bigger swoops on my Velocity for about 30 jumps, because I was flying my Velocity like my Katana. Once I started flying harness more and got used to the timing of the rears that the Velocity wanted, I added a good forty feet to my swoop. How many of these "other canopy pilots" have spent the time learning and taking advantage of the way the canopy was designed to be flown? If you fly a Katana like you fly a Crossfire 2, you'll probably get the same results that you get with the Crossfire 2, and maybe vice versa (though I think the Katana has a little more potential for speed and lift than the XF2 -- just my opinion).

There is no way that this statement is based on experience. The canopies feel totally different. The Katana feels and sounds far faster, and is far more responsive to inputs than the Crossfire 2 in my experience. Front riser pressure is a fraction of the Crossfire 2 and doesn't build up anywhere near as quickly. The toggle response is a LOT faster and the rear riser pressure is far heavier. The construction is totally different. The Katana compared to the Crossfire 2 has a wider aspect ratio (2.74:1 -- the widest on the modern market), thinner profile (I faced off the ribs of the two myself), and more elliptical shape (I've laid a KA97 on top of a XF2-99). The nose is totally different: it is not closed like a Crossfire 2 at all, but it is open with lower profile inlets. The lineset is longer, trimmed steeper, and positions suspended weight closer to the front of the canopy. They are both nine-cell ellipticals -- the similarities end there. How could you possibly think that these canopies are identical? This assessment simply could only be based on hearsay, and not experience examining or flying both canopies. They are completely different beasts. Have you actually flown both of these? I put 400 jumps on a Katana 97. I only put 50 on a borrowed Crossfire 2 99, but I feel that it was enough to make a comparison. I demoed the Katana 97 after borrowing the Crossfire 2, and decided to buy that, instead, after three jumps -- the difference between the two canopies is stark. Not to knock the Crossfire 2, though -- it's an awesome canopy, is my second favorite non-crossbraced elliptical nine-cell, and I would recommend it as readily as I recommend the Katana. I compared these two very, very closely before making the decision to purchase and found that the Katana is a very different beast in all respects. You can't pull this "they're the same canopy" wool over my eyes.

Think less. Jump more.

There is a drastic difference in the speed and recovery arc of front riser turns and overall flying style between the Crossfire 2 and the Velocity. Far less difference between the Katana and Velocity (compared to XF2). It's more the overall feel than anything else.

You are a wise man. I pity those who have yet to realize that beer is better than jogging. It's so simple and logical, but so many just don't get it. Can we rename this thread to "beer vs jogging"?

think less. jump more.

What would you say about 5'11" 198lbs... Velo 103 swooping in CO. You have to expect some adjustments when choosing to live and skydive a mile above everyone else in the world. ;) And don't knock Colorado fat boys. Have you ever tried jogging at 5,000'?

It totally depends on the canopy. I feel the Katana is best loaded at 2:1, and can't say the same for other non-cross-braced canopies I've flown or been around. Some canopies (even modern ones) lose performance when you go over 1:5 or even 1.3. Even then, the WL at which performance is lost is going to depend on the size, as well. But let's just look at the modern, high performance, nine cell class. That would be the Katana, Vengeance, Crossfire 2, Nitron, Vision, Comp Cobalt, Samurai, Firebolt, Demon, Rage, and whatever else I'm forgetting. You get the picture. Yeah, I'd say that 1.8:1 is probably as high as you want to go before moving to a cross-braced canopy. That doesn't necessarily mean "I load my Crossfire at 1.8 so I need to get a VX I load at 2.0". It means that you've reached the WL limit for your planform, and it's time to change type. Changing type and size at the same time can be an enormous handful. If you are a current swooper (read, at least a few hundred jumps a year, swooping on 99% of your landings) and want to get into the top tier of high performance canopies, at least spend some time with the new wing type at the same wingloading. It's totally plausible to change type and a little bit of size together, but demo/borrow and pull high to see what you want to do. Perfect example: Going from a Katana loaded at 1.8, after maybe 600 jumps or so, to a VX loaded at 2.0 won't be a big deal. The VX might even feel easier/slower in some regards. But going from a Crossfire 2 loaded at 1.8, with the same experience, to a Velocity loaded at 2 is a very bad idea for most people. Again, your mileage may vary. Hmmm... not really a Katana vs Velo thread anymore, eh?

Well, downwind and no wind. I load mine at 2:1 and have no problem coming to a stop with only a little headwind. But you're right, above 1.8:1, cross-braced is where it's at. At 2:1, I feel I'm right at the edge of this canopy's performance, and can even notice shorter swoops if I'm wearing a camera, a wingsuit, and a lot of clothing underneath. But... the forgiveness in the openings makes it a great canopy for a dedicated wingsuit rig without losing the fun canopy ride down. This is all assuming that you have the sufficient experience to handle these loadings. So we're on the same page, I follow Germain's 1.x where x is 1/100 of your jumps philosophy (and the jumper is making at least a few hundred skydives per year and trains to fly that loading).

IMO (Katana 97 vs Velo 96, 2:1 WL), the Katana flies like a Velocity with... - quicker toggle response - smoother openings - higher rear riser pressure - slightly less front riser pressure (there is very little in both canopies) - less low end lift - marginally slower speed at the end of a dive - feels marginally "softer"/less twitchy - loses performance over 2:1 (the Velo likes a hair more loading) It feels faster than the same size Velo to me in standard and rear riser flight modes. The thin profile and wide aspect ratio gives it more of a "slice-the-air"/"high-pitched" feel than the Velo in standard flight, says I. The canopy is aptly named. While the planforms are very different, the trim is similar and the position of your body relative to the canopy (very far forwards) is almost identical. The result is two ground hungry (read "fast") canopies that are easy to dive. To answer the biggest question that people have. The recovery arcs are basically the same. The Velo builds up a hair more speed, and then maintains it longer at the end of the swoop. Both canopies seem to like input to stay level through a swoop, and are better "trimmed" into gates on rears (as opposed to letting the canopy recover naturally). This is different than what I've found in the 27 cell canopies on the market, which tend to build speed quickly across a shorter, sharper recovery arc, and then "turf surf" with minimal input. IMO, PD's high performance offerings require a little more work than the competition. They're very easy to fly, actually, but just require more attention to be flown properly and safely. Very different beasts than anything else on the market. Your mileage will more than likely vary. Edited to fix typos and add: I get about 20% more from the Velo than the Katana on distance and marginally better on speed. I get better zone accuracy with the Katana then the Velo. This is just my experience. Really looking forward to the ZZ canopy coming out later. "Working man's Velocity" is a good description, Ian. The Katana is great for wingsuit pilots that want to swoop, but have scared themselves away from the Velo's openings.