alan

This seems odd to me. Bungee collapsible pc's are calibrated to inflate by about 80 mph airspeed. Cessna on jr with a cut still should be doing 85 or 90, even on the slow end. They _should_ inflate immediately. In my experience, they do and it is easy to docuement with video. Also tried holding a few out of a car window as the car accellerated. Most were inflated by 50 mph and all were inflated by 60 mph (and got nearly impossible to hang onto), hence they are not recommended for high performance swooping canopies, which can easily exceed those speeds and inflate the pc. alan

Do you have a new Wings? Do you have the owner's manual? If so, have you read it? In case you don't have it, the best source for answers to this type of question, is the rig manufacturer. You should contact them for a copy of the owner's manual. Page 19, paragraph 1 states: "The 3-Ring release system must be disassembled, flexed and inspected every month." Also, from the same page: "Immediate inspection is required if it has been subjected to some abuse such as drag {sic} across the runway, a water landing or exposure to a lot of dust or sand." There is a whole bunch of valuable information in the manual, including a detailed description of the 3-ring release system, how to maintain it, assemble it, and inspect it. alan

First some history: The original FXC was developed by HI-TEK Corporation, and then further developed and produced by FXC Corporation, both out of California. Parachutes de France later produced the FXC 12000 on license from FXC Corp. The American model was found to have some weaknesses that caused it to fire when it was not supposed to. This was, among other things, caused by leaks in an air hose inside the unit. PdF has developed the unit further and improved the quality of that air hose's attachment points. In 1994 the FXC Corporation recommended that all FXC 12000s should be updated to J-standard aka J-mod. This modification included more air filters for a "safer" and steadier inflow of air. Units that have gone through this modification have three gold colored filters on the control unit that allow air to flow into it. Only units that have been updated to J-standard have these filters. Some data for the FXC: Accuracy: 0-1800ft: -100ft / +300ft 1800-3500ft: -200ft / +400ft Note: The accuracy is no longer acceptable at DZs that are at an elevation such that the firing altitude is above 3500ft. The manufacturer can calibrate the units to be appropriate for these altitudes, but non-calibrated units will not be. Firing parameters: None at speeds below 40ft/sec Possible at speeds above 40ft/sec Effective at speeds above 65ft/sec Altitude setting/re-cocking: The manufacturer recommends that the main canopy is deployed at least 1500ft above the set firing altitude for the unit. The jumper should be under a fully opened canopy at least 1000ft above the set firing altitude. This is done to allow the pressure within the two internal chambers to equalize with the outside pressure before reaching the set firing altitude. If the chambers don't have time to equalize before the set firing altitude the right chamber will have a higher pressure than the left one as an air hose inside opens. When this occurs a membrane will either move enough to cause the unit to fire, or just enough for the locking pins to move slightly, which can cause a misfire on later jumps. The same can to a certain degree happen if the jumper engages in "sharp" turns while under canopy. The FXC must be re-cocked if there is a suspicion of a "near-fire". It is not enough to just recalibrate it. To re-cock the unit it must be removed from the rig! The unit should be in JUMP mode while doing this. Since it has to be removed from the rig, I'd strongly recommend that a rigger does this and it might not be legal for the jumper to do it. The reserve has to be re-sealed anyhow, so it's just as well to let the rigger do the whole procedure. To re-cock the unit you need to place a round screwdriver, or a designated "loop" through the eye at the end of the release cable. Stand on the screwdriver, or the "loop" and pull the main unit straight up. Do not pull on the cablehousing or the airhose. Pull it steadily until it stops and hold it there for a few seconds. Do not pull too hard, or after the cable has been pulled to its outer position, as this can cause damage to the triangle spring, which controls the release mechanism. Release gently until it stops. Calibrating the unit: Always make sure the unit is set in the JUMP position before calibarting it. On earlier models it was necessary to take up any slack that was present inside the control unit when setting the altitude. This was done by first setting it to 4 (4000ft) and then go back down to 1 (1000ft). This should not be necessary on models with the J-mod (FXC says it's not necessary), but there's no harm in doing it. Make sure that the needle is directly above the 1-line. There's a small gap between the needle and the dial-face, so one could be fooled a little by the shadow effect that is created. After the unit has been calibrated for the day it is not necessary to do anything with it unless the air pressure has changed "significantly" (i.e. the needle has moved noticeable from the original position) or the unit has been turned off. The unit should always be in the JUMP position. This even includes when shipping the unit. It should only be set in the OFF position for short periods of time, which include going back down with the plane, landing in water, landing in deep snow, or before the trunk of a car is slammed shut with the unit inside it. The reason for this is that a membrane/seal that closes the valve for the air hose can be deformed because it remains closely pressed against the valve opening. This deformation can influence the firing altitude, as the membrane/seal does not close the valve sufficiently during regular use. In other words, turning the unit OFF and leaving it that way for a long period of time can increase the chances of the unit misfiring. Finally, the unit should stay at least 15 minutes in the outside temperature before calibrating it, to make sure that all its components have reached the same temperature. Failing to do this could lead to a wrong setting, as changes in temperature could cause movements within the materials. alan

Mike, sorry for the delay in responding. I've been busy with the Holidays and all and wanted to get some additional info as well. I talked to Chris Martin at Precision and he will be sending me some technical information soon and I will post it when I get it. Until then, here is what I can tell you. Your canopy is probably "mostly" 346# HMA and you should plan on replacing them after about 800 jumps. These lines have been in field use for several years now on the Nitro with line sets lasting over 1200 jumps. I don't think we will see a repeat of what we saw with Vectran lines where many people were surprised to see how fast they "wore out". There are considerable differences between HMA lines and other arimids. Kevlar, for example is an arimid that was used for suspension lines at one time. Its use has faded as other fibers exhibited better overall performance. Kevlar is a _low_ modulus arimid. Vectran and HMA differ as well. You will find the HMA lines to be MUCH more resistant to abrasion while remaining very dimensionally stable. I hope this helps for now and I will post more later. alan

Rob, since you didn't suggest the Genera from Rigging Innovations as a cost effective alternative, I will. They are not flashy and you may not see many around, but they are a great rig at a great price. Great _value_ for your dollar. What is the downside to a Genera? They are not flashy and you may not see many around, so they don't have as good a resale potential as some other rigs. alan

Vectran is not as abrasion resistant as Spectra and will show considerable wear after 200 or so jumps but it is much more resistant to heat and will stay in trim longer. Where you jump also affects line wear, so 100 jumps in some sandy, dusty DZ in AZ may result in considerably more wear than a nice grassy DZ in PA. Spectra typically does not go out of trim as a result of stretching, but shrinks from the heat generated by the friction from the slider grommets coming down and from the friction from the elongation and contraction of the fibers themselves during openings. The outboard "A" and "D" lines, and the brake lines usually show the most wear and shrinkage. The manufacturer of your canopy will be happy to provide the correct trim tolerances if your rigger doesn't already have them. They are sometimes included in the owners manual of the canopy. Have a competent rigger check the trim and if it is out of the manufacturers recommended tolerances, have it re-lined. Because Spectra lines shrink slowly over a period of several hundred jumps, the change in performance it effects on the canopy is subtle and often goes unnoticed. The jumper slowly adjusts and compensates. This is bad and I suspect it is, in many cases, a substantial factor in the performance characteristics that are attributed to canopies, ie., it flares bad, opens hard, snivels too long, etc.. Many people give out opinions on the performance of a canopy and don't even realize that it may be badly out of trim, thus giving false impressions. So, bottom line..... your Spectra lines may need to be replaced after "around" 300 jumps because they will most likely be getting out of trim. Vectran lines may need replacing "around" 300 jumps because they are worn, even though they will most likely still be in trim. alan

Hmmm.....I'm not real up to date on the new SIM, but live water training used to be a requirement for the B license. Your question seems to imply that if it is indeed still a requirement, that it may be routinely getting pencil whipped. If you jump at a USPA Group Memeber DZ and you know this is happening, you should bring it to the attention of your regional director. alan

I wonder why they feel it is superior to the one produced by Rigging Innovations? alan

I think the 4'99 is still a great aid and something you can refer back to as often as you wish. Get a couple of your friends together and split the cost. Coaches are fine, but don't be fooled, you are not spending all of that money on skydives. Want to have a ton of fun and get some really great coaching for free? Get a team together and compete in your region of the National Skydiving League. http://www.skyleague.com/ There is a novice class for those newer people who are afraid that they "aren't good enough to compete". Nonsense! Kurt Gaebel has done a fantastic job of putting this together and it is growing every year. You can't imagine how fun and easy it is and there are always experienced jumpers/teams that will go out of their way to help/coach the new jumpers. If you have a brand new "A" and 50 jumps, and want to learn 4 way, it is the way to go. Once you have some experience and want to make a bigger committment, then go out and hire a coach or two, they will help you get to the next level. alan

This sounds right to me. Remember, the PD 190 is a design that is well over 10 years old (it was introduced in 1987). Technology has changed much since that design was introduced. Back then 400' to 600' openings were more the norm as opposed to todays 600' to 800'. Those openings are very accpeptable but considered "brisk" by what many of us have become accustomed to with the newer canopy designs. On your PD 190, a 400' opening would get your attention, while a 600' would have you thinking "man, that was sweet!" A 300' opening would likely leave some bruising and would certainly have you complaining about it. As an aside, for those of you who may not be aware of it, the reason I went to John LeBlanc for information about the Spectre openings, is that he is the designer and manufacturer. John, along with Bill Coe, founded Performance Designs. alan

Ditto Josh and Chuck. The FX/VX are noted for not having much response to the toggles in the top 6" or so, hell that pretty much goes for all Icarus canopies. Many of us set them up even a little looser to insure that there is no tail deflection during an aggressive front riser input, to maintain the integrity/efficiency of the airfoil. You'll soon get used to it, but harness input seems to be adequate for most relatively minor adjustments and once you dial in the rear riser spread for the surf, you'll be nothing but smiles. alan

As promised, I asked John LeBlanc about the opening distances on the Spectre. Wow! What a nice guy, he replied just a few minutes after I sent the e-mail request. Here is the relevant portion of his reply, and thank you John for the info. "It's my pleasure to contribute when I'm asked......As for the openings, many people have no idea how fast time and altitude flies as they wave off and pull. Also, altimeters are notoriously inaccurate during pull time when a person is changing from belly flying to sit flying. (This is one reason why CYPRESes go off act between 700 and 1100 feet, even though they have a very sensitve and accurate pressure measuring device, or so say Gerard Fetter.) An opening on a modern canopy that takes 400 feet can be painful, and one that takes 300 feet longer feels like a loooong snivel. The openings on everything we've built from the Stiletto onward take about 6-800 feet. The Silhouette tends to be a bit quicker, and the Velocity and Spectre are usually on the slower side of this figure. (We thought of the Silhouette as sort of a PD-2, in a way. Its a great canopy, a sleeper in our product range.) A lot of things go into the opening distance of modern canopies. I believe that things like jumpsuit size, body position while under the snivelling canopy, the way in which the jumper transitions to sitting in the harness, and even the way the jumper throws his pilot chute all effect the opening distance. (All this fits into my beginner's mind thing. No expert opinions here, just observations that lead to hunches.) Of course there is the pilot chute variables, the line type and condition, trim changes, canopies shrinking of stretching into a new shape over time due to environmental factors. The Spectre has been our best selling canopy for several years, though I expect the Sabre2 to take the lead. The openings are one reason why this is true, I believe. As for good test data, we are also limited to the available sensing devices. We use sensitive aircraft altimeters for cutaway testing of reserves, but the three needles tend to vibrate into a blur when exposed to the buffetting in freefall, so that doesn't work well on main canopies. We've had canopies come back here with the 1000 foot opening story many times over the past ten years or so. In almost every case, the canopies opened in much shorter distances and the customer's preferences or prior canopy experience led to the exaggeration. If they actually do even close to the 1000 foot mark, our test jumpers usually ask, "What the heck are the complaining about? Do they want to sell it?" Hope this helps somewhat. John" I hope this helps to dispell one of the great misconceptions out there about canopy opening distances. It is a pet peeve of mine! ;-) alan

I asked John Leblanc and Simon Mundell about this and here are their replies, in part, as I didn't want to include any comments not strictly pertaining to the airfoil comment. John LeBlanc: "Yes it does use the same airfoil, and for good reason. When the Stiletto was in the design phase, the skydiving public was getting very concerned about the stability of the Nova. I knew there was a lot of effort put into that canopy, and look what happened. For that reason, we wanted to take a very conservative approach to the Stiletto as far as airfoil. That way we would reduce the possibility of "surprises" after the Stiletto introduction. Therefore, we used the Sabre airfoil for the Stiletto and the Spectre, as it was designed to have stability with a large speed range, emphasizing good low speed handling. Changes in planform (ellipticalness),aspect ratio, and trim are responsible for the performance improvement over the original Sabre. We've gone beyond that airfoil on the Vengeance, the Velocity, and the Sabre2, by the way." Simon Mundell: "The only similarity with the VX and the Stiletto is that they have 9 cells and are made of the same ZP fabric. With the exception of these points they are very different designs." alan

I'm gonna jump in here kinda late, but with all of the discussion on wing loading, I haven't seen any mention of density altitude. I hope this doesn't make this too technical but I think it is important to note that a 1.2 wing loading on a 72 degree day at 750' msl with 30% relative humidity will be considerably different than on a 92 degree day at 1500' msl with an 80% relative humidity. Jump in the Denver area and that fairly conservative 1.2 becomes a pretty aggressive wing loading. alan

You were doing pretty well until here. The Stiletto uses the same airfoil as the Sabre, but it is trimmed different and is not a constant aspect ratio plan form. alan

I see and hear this type of comment quite often regarding the Spectre and a few other canopies. It is mostly based on hearsay, intuition, debateable protrac readings, or a couple of quick glances at an altimeter. I have videotaped several of these _1000'_ openings and have found that the tape indicates that they are actually in the 600' to 800' range. Remember, you are going about 176'/sec when you look at your altimeter, there is typically some "lag" in it(it shows ~3000' when you are actually at ~2800'), you have to process what you see, decide to pull, wave off, then actually pull. That process usually takes about 3 secs, at 176'/sec it will put you at 2272' to 2472' before the bag even leaves the container. Now, deduct the 600' it actually takes to open (pitch to slider 2/3 down) and you have 1872. That is going to look a lot like 1800' or even 2000' to many people. Now do you see where these 1000' to 1200' openings come from? I'm not picking on the Spectre here, or any canopy for that matter, and there are always exceptions but I believe if you will do as I have done and video these openings, you will find that the 1000' opening is more fiction than fact. In the interest of accuracy and fairness, I'll e-mail John LeBlanc at PD and ask him what their test jump data revealed and post it here. Who knows, perhaps my results will turn out to be erroneous! alan

Thanks Paul, your posts in this forum have been very informative and should be beneficial for those who take the time to read and understand them. That may take a little studying, BUT......................... Todays high performance canopies require that the pilot have skill, experience, and knowledge in order to fly them safely and efficiently. Unfortunately, many of the pilots I see today get under these canopies and are deficient in at least one of these areas and often times more than one. To some extent, most get away with it by making up for it in one or two of the other areas, ie., they lack knowledge, but compensate with more experience and maybe better skills. That is a real shame, because the really good pilots are strong in all three areas. Enough said. alan

I talked to George about a month ago about having him re-line my VX with HMA lines and he said he couldn't that they (Precision) didn't have the trim specs for HMA continuous lines on the VX and he didn't want to do it using the specs for the Xaos. He suggested that I talk to Gyro. I wonder what changed his mind? Maybe it has something to do with the Xaos 21 being on the market and the Xaos 27 still in testing. Maybe I should make another phone call. alan

It is difficult to give this kind of advice without actually inspecting the canopy, but with that said, it sounds like an easy, quick, and inexpensive fix for a master rigger. You may also want to find out more about what might cause such a tear, so ask a few questions when you take it to the rigger. You did a smart thing by having a rigger go over it before you bought it, but it appears you may have also learned another lesson. Riggers can and do make mistakes and some riggers are better than others. Be picky about who you choose for a rigger. alan

Exactly Ramon. He may also be confusing a wing over with a barrel roll, where you dive, pull out of it and do a 360 towards the horizon, going inverted and coming back to level flight towards the horizon again on the same heading as the climb was initiated. alan

Paul, maybe you could share some information on a static stall vs. a dynamic stall. I think this is kinda the direction you are going here. Many jumpers are not aware of the dynamics here. During the recivery arc, when the canopy has a relatively high induced airspeed (creating additional lift), it is also carrying a heavier load due to the additional G forces, correct? What happens when the pilot finds himself "in the corner" and attmepts a quick recovery by radically changing the camber of the airfoil and aoa at the same time, while pulling 1.5 Gs on a canopy that was already .5# over the recommended wing loading? Also, as an aside regarding the "speed=lift" comments in another thread, I understand the point you are trying to make, but please understand the context in which that comment is usually made. In my opinion, it is not made as a defintion or or a limiting comment, but rather as a rule of thumb for canopy flight to instill the idea that it is a good idea to maintain a safe airspeed, especially during the landing phase, and to fly the canopy efficiently. I all too often see pilots pumping the brakes on final and during the flare itself, reducing the efficiency of the wing. I think that can account for many of the unexplained stalls/canopy collapses that we hear about and see, especially if there is some turbulence. Would a CFI instruct his student in a 152 to alternately and rapidly increase and decrease the flaps on final, using a slow approach, in turbulence? How often do you have to remind the student to "keep the nose down"? That, is where I believe the speed equals lift comments are mostly directed. There is nothing wrong with maintaining a safe airspeed, letting it bleed off in ground effect, and landing with a wing that is still flying. Go with it and keep a good perspective. alan

Very good reply Tee. Also, once or twice a month, remove the lense and clean it under running water, using a VERY soft cloth, VERY little. I just use my fingers. Then smear on a liberal amount of the anti-fog solution available at any SCUBA dive shop used on dive masks and rinse. This, combined with Tees' advice seems to work well for me. alan

Try putting the goggles on over the outside of the helmet. alan

I had the same experience when I purchased my VX. Some rigger info would be nice, but I think the feeling on the instructions goes something like this.......If you truly have the experience to be jumping this canopy, at this level, you should no longer need instructions. alan

Not really. The position is less stable, which allows for more speed, or agility if you will, in flying to the new grips. The old article in one of last years Parachutists , mentioned in another reply, explains the theory pretty well. Anhedral as opposed to dihedral. alan