alan

The Vengeance and Samurai are comparable canopies. They are at least Stiletto class in performance and my opinion is that they are a notch above it. alan

My guess is that Rob was comparing PCA to Direct Bag when he said it gives the student too much time to interfere. Also for FJC, you have to cover the PC over malfunction where the PC goes over the nose instead of trailing behind. I think Para-Gear and/or PPM would have some photos/diagrams/descriptions of the S/L PAC. alan

Just a thought, the above could also be interpreted to mean it can also give you more loss of control as well, and do it really fast and close to the ground. Just offering a different perspective. alan

Good replies here. When you pull the front riser, you are changing both the trim angle and angle of attack on at least a portion of the airfoil and the wing itself, for some period of time. And, to some extent, you are also changing the airfoil itself. A lot of things are happening that interact with each other. The turbulence creates varying pressures on the canopy, which wants to seek and maintain its' neutral state. This is felt as buffeting. You can also be flirting with getting the front of the airfoil into or near a negative angle of attack. That can cause a collapse or partial collapse. Buffeting is warning signal. Also, as the AOA changes, the stagnation point moves relative to the nose opening and this changes the pressurization fo the canopy. When the canopy loses pressure, it changes shape and loses efficiency. You can also feel this. Bottom line, very very careful in turbulence. Use caution and good judgement. Airspeed and pressurization are your friends in turbulence as long as the flight path of the canopy is more along the ground than at it. ;-) alan

At the risk of sounding arrogant, I'm going to comment on this. I don't know what DZ you jump at or any of the people you jump with, but, that being said, be careful during your quest to learn. I've been around for a few years now and have been to a number of DZs. There are a lot of peple at the DZ who may APPEAR to know what they are talking about, but few actually do. Hell, just look at some of the questions and answers you see in these forums. There are only a handful that really know what they are talking about. Others just pass on misconceptions, myths, rumors and even just plain old wrong information......even some who are very experienced. I just had a conversation yesterday with a friend about this. He's in that 200 to 400 jump range. That seems like a lot of jumps to many people, especially the newer ones. Now don't get me wrong, I've never been an advocate of using jump numbers alone to indicate someone's skill or knowledge, but they can give a relative idea of experience. But, we both agreed that it seems when many of us get to that range, we start getting very confident and an exaggerated perception of our abilities. We want to share our knowledge and the newer people tend to seek us out because they see and hear us often. The peoblem is, few jumpers at that level have the Skill, Knowledge, AND Experience to be teaching or giving sound advice. If you are going to skydive (more than once), you need to know how to fly a canopy. Period. There is no getting around that. Therefore, you need to know how to fly. None of us starts out as an expert pilot and none of us will ever know everything there is to know. But, we need to know more than what we are learning now. Some steps have been taken to improve our knowledge of canopy flight, but each and everyone of us needs to take the responsibility for ourselves and make the effort to learn more about the basic principles of aerodynamics and flight. I think it was billvon, quite some time ago, that suggested we all get out to a local flight school and take a few introductory flight lessons. What a great investment that would be for many of us! Someone else, I think in an article in Parachutist or Skydiving a while back, suggested taking a senior rigger's course, not necessarily to become a rigger, but to learn more about your equipment! I learned much as a young man building and flying model airplanes. I took that base and learned more as a student pilot. Now, I have taken flight lessons in UL aircraft. I read and learn as much as I can about the theory of flight. I go to the DZ and try to apply it. Don't go out and just do the came canopy flight over and over. I've said it before and I'll repeat it, it does not do you any good to have 1000 jumps if the last 900 are just a repeat of the first 100. Challenge yourselves. Work on building new skills and practice them. Don't "waste" a jump. Have a plan for every jump that will help you become a better canopy pilot. I can remeber when I used to JM a lot of SL students. I followed out whenever I could. There were those around the DZ that laughed, said it wasn't worth the pack job, or said I was just trying to build jump numbers. Fair enough.......BUT, I earned a PRO rating at just under 600 jumps....on a Jedei 136 @ about 1.6 at the time. I could take ANY canopy on the DZ and stand up in the circle on any given day, not just when the conditions were good. I could stand up a Tandem in the circle under a SET 400 on one jump and then drop in a Sabre 170 on the next. I could put a Manta in it on a gusty windy day, then do it with the Jedei on a hot, no wind day. Now, I can land an 89 VX @2.5 downwind on a hot day........standing up. Why? Because I read, I studied and I put into practice what I was learning. And, I made my share of mistakes. I like to think that none of them was fatal because I took an orderly, progressive approach to learning and I tried to learn on EVERY jump. I apologize for the rant. You CAN and SHOULD learn alot at the DZ. You can and should learn a lot here in the forums at Dropzone.com. You can and should use a variety of resources for learning. What I'm saying is be careful who you learn from. That can be difficult, but watch and listen. After some time you will begin to know. Do people SUPPORT what they say? Do other respected sources and references support what they are saying? Do your homework. I'll use one of my pet peeves as an example. The person who continually is making claims of 1000' snivels or 1200' openings. Be very careful of ANY advice or information you get from that person. 1000' and 1200' openings are very uncommon and most of us would consider that type of opening as a streamer. I'm not saying they don't happen and I'm not saying the person is lying. I'm saying we should be cautious of such information, don't take it or anything at face value. I've dicussed it with several manufacturers. Rarely can they substantiate any of these claims when someone sends the canopy back because of it. They all agree an 800' opening is a long one. I've done video of many openings. Six seconds is a long one and in several cases, the jumpers SWORE they were 8 to 10 seconds. Watch the video...........the time can be displayed. I didn't mean to get off topic, I just wanted to use it as an illustration. Be careful and each of us must take it upon ourselves to learn. Challenge yourself to learn/master a new skill under canopy on your next jump. When you have mastered one canopy, try another. And don't assume that because space and traffic are not a concern at your DZ that they are not a concern. It has been said here before, quite often, what happens when you go to a boogie or new/bigger DZ? Did you prepare for that? Are you prepared? Have you learned and practiced the needed skills? Do you even know what they are? I'm not trying to attack you , or anyone personally. I'm just trying to point out that WHAT you learn is what is really important. Be selective of what you learn and who you learn it from. Sorry, I get like then whenever I learn of a fatality.......it's in a different thread. alan

Chris can you explain what you mean by taking 30 days to decide if it is worth it? alan

Initially, yes it does cost more and could be considered expensive, but remeber, the HMA line set will last at least twice as long ( for only about $200 more, which is less than the cost of a Vectran re-line) and after the initial conversion, the cost is the same. What this means is that you actually end up spending less over the life of the canopy. The up front cost can easily be justified. alan

I don't give a damn what's in the hand. What I want to know is that Xaos-27 84 the one you are sending me to evaluate? BTW page 216 PPM Vol. I lists a P9-S and describes it as a manually or automatically operated bag deployed seat assy with a C-11 canopy in sage green nylon assy. It seems the "-S" is a subtle diference that makes all the difference! :-) I was thinking it may have just been an overlooked detail. alan

Hehe! I know, I said it was a "seat assembly" _made for_ a C-11 round by Pioneer. Obviously another "P9" piece of hardware out there. Can't wait to see it! alan

A seat assembly made by Pioneer for a C-11round? alan

A seat assembly made by Pionneer for a C-11 round? alan

I think BASE technology is ahead of current reserves in some areas, although I don't believe most of the current state of the art BASE canopies would pass TSO testing. One example, the use of open mesh on the bottom skin of BASE canopies. May not hold up to speed/weight drop tests, but perhaps it could with some work. What about releaseable steering lines as a solutiuon to some line over mals? May not be a great option on a heavily loaded reserve, but some people don't overload them and I think it is a better option than trying to get out the hook knife. Just some thoughts. alan

You may have had a slight crosswind that went unnoticed. Or, you may have unknowingly been sitting in the harness with a little more weight on one side and instinctively correcting with the opposite toggle, causing a forward slip, meaning the canopy had a straight track across the ground into the wind, but with a slightly offset heading. Try it at altitude with another similar canopy/wingloading flying neutral for a reference. When might you want to be able to do this as a practiced skill? Also, just for fun, try inputting a little front riser and then correcting with the opposite toggle. Talk to the CReW guys, they can tell you how it will affect the canopies flight and the application for the technique. alan

I've seen/heard this comment before. It seems to be a repeat of some marketing promo by Jumpshack because I have never seen any reliable data to support it. Who did the tests? When? How were they conducted? How was "reserve time" defined for the tests? What rigs were they tested against? Where are the results published? I'm not trying to be rude but I think if it is true, then people should be aware of it and have the data available. That is one of the benefits of a moderated forum, people should be a be to find accurate, reliable information and sometimes that means examining or questioning comments that are often taken at face value. alan

Like Dave Brownell, I have been using Spectra for my main closing loop for several years now. It way outlasts the standard nylon loops. And yes, pull it out slowly to reduce friction heat. Sandy Reid at RI suggested to me a few years back that I should put my thumb over the loop when I pull the pull-up chord out and pull it slow enough that I didn't feel any heat. alan

No stealing involved, just consider it shared. BTW, thanks for the informative posts you've been making lately, both here and in the Swooping & Canopy Control forum. I hope the lurkers and especially the newer jumpers realize that you are one of the people to listen to. alan

I use a Slink to attach my bridle to the attachment ring on the canopy. If PD would just put 5 of them in the bag, then I wouldn't have to make my own. alan

Well said Andy, very well said. I hope your point doesn't get lost in the thread. alan

In a stable, face to earth position, terminal velocity is generally accepted as being about 176 ft/sec. That means that in 6 sec at terminal velocity you would travel about 1056 ft. That is pretty consistent with what is generally taught in most first jump courses and what is in the SIM......you travel about 1000' in 6 sec at terminal velocity. You seem to feel that with a snivelling/opening parachute above you, adding drag and decellerating you, that you somehow manage to travel 1200' to 1500' in the same 6 seconds that the rest of us travel 1000' in at terminal with nothing out. I understand that as the bag comes out and stands you up during the period of snatch force, that there may be a brief period of accelleration, but the decelleration experienced during the opening shock more than offsets that. Your numbers don't work. A slow opening on a canopy such as the Crossfire is about 800 ft. Openings longer than that are certainly possible, but rare. Opening = pitch(pc inflation) until slider is 3/4 down lines. alan

I would NOT try shutting it down under the circumstances you describe. The answer is very simple and pretty safe if you have been working on your canopy skills. They even have an event in some of the swooping meets that allows canopy pilots to demonstrate the skill needed for just this circumstance. All you need to do is bump the toggles enough to pitch the canopy up and climb 7 or 8 feet, fly over the top of the mother and child, ease up on the toggles and let the canopy resume its' decent into ground effect, resuming your surf. You will have lost considerable (and valuable) airspeed that will will need to convert into lift for a proper flare, so the landing won't be as pretty as you may have been hoping for, but with smooth, unpanicked inputs, you should be able to slide it out. This skill doesn't have to be limited to to a highly loaded x-braced canopy. Years ago, there used to an ad in Parachutist for a certain popular canopy featuring Charlie Mullins at about age 16, if my memory is correct, quoting him as saying; "No ditch to deep, no fence too high." I occassionally practice this at the DZ. Gives everyone a laugh and the opportunity to snicker about how Al just screwed up a landing really bad. It saved my life last summer when one of our pilots didn't see me and turned off the runway in front of me. I was on an 89 VX at over 2.4 and doing closer to 70 mph near the bottom of my recivery arc and headed into the propwash of a C182. I popped up to about 15 or 20 feet, flew over the propwash and did a slide, stumble, run, stumble landing, but walked away from it. Another option is a carving turn in the swoop. With a little practice this can be done safely as well and is often demonstrated during the Pro swoop meets. On an FX at 1.9 you might just have to apply a little brakes and shift in the harness. You can also do a flaring, flat or braked turn using just the toggles. It doesn't hurt to be good at this kind of stuff, no matter what type of canopy you fly or what the wing loading is. Kids can run out in front of big, slow canopies at the last instant as well. Of course, there will be times when there is just simply nothing you can do. You can be driving down the highway at 60 mph when suddenly a child runs out. Sometimes there is time to swerve away, slow down enough ,or even stop. Sometimes there is not. The same is true with your scenario. There are a multitude of variables involved. Pilot skill. Pilot reaction time. Reaction time available. Canopy performance. Etc. etc. The FX at 1.9 is going to give you the speed that may take away from how long the pilot has to react, but it may also provide the performance needed to successfully perform an avoidance maneuver. It helps if the pilot has the skill, knowledge, training, practice, and experience to pull it off. Know your canopy and be a good pilot. 1000 landings under a canopy won't give you the skills you need if the last 900 are just a repeat of the first 100. I hope this helps. alan

I think the angles from which the pictures have been taken have influenced your perception of the span-wise distortion of the wings in question. I'm not saying you are wrong, just that the photos are not apples to apples and therefore may give the wrong impression. alan

I agree with you, but we all have different perceptions of what consitutes a new jumper or experienced jumper. For me, someone with an A license and is out buying their first gear is not the same as a student (although, in a sense we are all students as long as we jump, or should be). In this case, both Mary and Andy, although relatively new jumpers, are experienced enough to where I consider it important that they start going beyond the simplified student versions. Hence my reply. I couldn't agree with you more. My feeling was/is Andy and Mary are in that grey zone and thus needed to be taken beyond the one size fits all stage of learning. We still agree. Where we digress is in the assessment of our audience I guess. Since Mary was buying her own gear, I thought the 78 mph was important. She may have been jumping student gear with an AAD type/brand that could have had firing parameters that would allow for a reserve deployment with a malfunctioning main still above her or during the more aggressive canopy manuevers she may want to try with her new gear, it is not just about fall rate. Maybe I was wrong in thinking that a new graduate with new, non-student gear was ready for correct information. I didn't anticipate it becoming an issue over semantics. Something that has gotten lost in this conversation was my stated concern over how mis-information spreads. Somebody says; my Spectre takes 1200' to open, somebody else hears it and repeat it, pretty soon it becomes common knowledge that a Specre takes 1200' too open, when in fact it, except for rare cases, is a myth. Pretty soon, we''ll be hearing that the Cypres fires at terminal velocity, that will become common knowledge, and a lot of new jumpers will slip through the cracks not knowing it fires at speeds above 78 mph when they do need that knowledge. When I made my comment, I had no way of knowing if Andy knew the actual parameters or was just simplifying or repeating what he had heard. I said it before, we could debate forever on the how much and when. I stand by my comment. alan

"if you pass through a certain altitude at terminal velocity." "if it senses a speed above 78mph at an altitude above 750 feet." I considered "at terminal velocity" to be wrong/inaccurate because it did not give any hint as to the true published firing parameter of sensing a speed above 78 mph. How much do you have to know? Enough to stay alive. I think it is important to know this much or I wouldn't have posted my comments, which BTW were also intended to spark an exchange of information. My thinking is that with more accurate and/or detailed information you can make better choices for what your procedures are as opposed restricting yourself to simple scenarios such as you present above. You have long been a proponent of, your procedures are based on the gear you have on and the circumstances of the jump. I think one of the problems we have today, as evidenced by Skyrose7, is that too many Instructors feel their task is to present a lot of information in a (relativelty) short time so they keep it simple to the point the student misses out on a lot of information they should be getting. We could debate forever as to how much and when. alan

Here is a link that will help you determine the real value of a used Cypres. Regardless of the current list price, there are quite a few dealers selling new ones for around $850. http://www.poxon.org/Craig/Skydive/Tools/CypresValuer.asp alan

And now we have come to why I introduced the RSL issue in my previous reply to Mary (Skyrose7). It is not about you should/shouldn't have a Cypres and/or RSL. It is about making an informed choice and knowing what to do with what you have and why. alan