alan

As Rob has pointed out, when you talk about performance it depends on what aspect of it you are referring to. Typically 7 cell canopies have a lower aspect ratio (span/average chord) and 9 cell canopies have a higher aspect ratio. For a given area of wing and at lower airspeeds, one with a higher aspect ratio will generate more lift than one with a lower aspect ratio. An example of this is a sailplane or glider. They have very long wings and a short chord on the airfoil. Changing the planform to an elliptical shape also makes the wing more efficient, ie.faster and faster creates more lift. This is partially why 9 cell ellipticals are said to "out perform" 7 cell canopies. The performance parameters they are referring to are speed and lift. A 150 sq. ft. 9 cell elliptical with a 170# pilot will fly farther and faster than a 150 sq. ft. 7 cell canopy with the same pilot. This also partially explains why we can load the 9 cell ellipticals more heavily and still land them. They are more efficient and have wider range of flight speed. Cross bracing simply adds to the effiency by making the wing more rigid and therefore having less distortion. Distortion reduces the amount of lift. Yes, the small cross braced canopies are capable of very fast speeds, but the real beauty in them is that they can be flown slow enough to be landed safely by a good pilot. A 46 sq. ft. Diablo could be flown, but it would simply not provide enough lift at the lower airspeeds needed to land to be landed safely. There are trade offs in perfromance. Rate of turn, glide angle, openings, etc. High aspect ratio 9 cell elliptical canopies typically are not as reliable for on heading openings, however; the newer designs using the latest advancements in technology have started to provide soft, on heading openings at a reliable rate. More speed means a longer runway is needed. Speed also magnifies the consequences of even small mistakes. So, Rob is correct. The term "performance" can refer to a number of different aspects of flight. A VX does not make a very good choice for doing CRW, but it can do a barrel roll with very little effort. That 7 cell canopy is usually a pretty good choice for CRW, but would be difficult if not impossible to barrel roll. Now, what about those 7 cell cross braced canopies? Actually they are 21 cells with the higher aspect ratios usually associated with 9 cell canopies. The VX? 27 cells with a slightly higher aspect ratio than the FX. More lines on the 9 (27) cell canopies create more drag than on the 7 (21) cell canopies, but that is more than offset by the additional lift provided by the higher aspect ratio, with less distortion. As far as the manufacurers claims, someone else already said it best. Marketing. I hope this has helped you to better understand some of the aerodynamics of todays canopies. A full explanation would require a book (or more), so I hope this is sufficient. alan Edited by alan on 6/7/01 11:22 AM.

I talked to George Galloway last week and he said he would try to send me a Xoas 21 to review after the swoop meet in Perris. Look for an article here on Dropzone.com soon after. The new reserve is supposed to be TSO'd to 180 kts. He isn't releasing much information until his dealers have all of it. The release of the Xaos 27 won't be until later. It looks as if Precision is going to expand their role as a major player in the canopy market. alan

You're welcome and thank you for setting it up with Brian. He was great to work with and writing the article was easy...that canopy is so much fun to fly. I talked to George Galloway last week and I believe he will be sending me a Xaos21 soon to evaluate. alan

I hope the following helps. "Bomber Mfg. Inc. has arranged to purchase the physical assets of Flite Line Sys. Inc.. Replcement and spare parts for current model Reflex H/C systems will be avaialable for purchse in approximately 45 to 60 days. Any questions should be sent to [e-mail]info@bombermfg.com[/e-mail] and will be addressed as soon as possible. Phone numbers and other contact information will be available soon. Please pass this information along to other parties." -Ryan Gifford, Bomber Mfg. Inc. alan

Ramon, I have quite a few jumps on both the VX and FX. The Team EXTreme stats that you posted are very close to my preferences. VX 2.4 and FX 1.8 The FX at 1.8 will out fly any non-cross braced canopy at the same loading. One thing to remember is pilot skill. A great pilot who is dialed in on a Stiletto at 1.8 could out surf an average pilot on an FX at 1.8 who is not dialed in. As far as front riser dives, the FX is very heavy on the front risers and will fly out of the dive, but it does have a very long recovery arc though. alan

"What do ya'll think? Should I have my rigger correct the problem before I jump it again(which could be a while) or ASAP? Thanks!" phorty, You or your rigger should contact the manufacturer for the correct specifications for the cables and how to check them properly. It may vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. My advice would be to do this before jumping the rig. Be safe, alan

"To get the "In Reply to:" to show up you have to use the *** tag. Just put [ quote ] whatever you want to quote [ /quote ] inside the *** tags. You'll have to copy and paste what you want to quote from their post." Thanks, I'll try it. The quote tags won't go on until after I do the copy and paste though??? So, I highlighted this, did the copy /paste, then put in the quote tags. let's see what happens. alan

Jay, Have you tried posting your question in the Photography and Video Forum? I wish I could be of more help, but I'll bet someone there has an answer for you. alan

Dave, just a friendly reminder, and to all, this forum is for gear and rigging questions. If you have gear for sale, please list it in the Classifieds or Auctions. alan

Hi again Ben, First, I have to ask, how do you guys get that neat little "In reply to:" thing to show up? It is embarassing being a moderator and not figuring that out! Next. None of what you have posted came across to me as dissing or anything negative. I got the feeling that you were someone new that wants to learn and doesn't have a lot of knowledge about the dynamics of canopy flight. I hope that Dropzone.com is a place you will visit often, as it is full of great information and resources. Lastly, in reponse to this, "i just still dont understand why making such a big change (based on weight) is "asking for trouble"" I had hoped that the article I refered you to by John L. about "Wing Loading and its Effects" would have answered this for you. I'll try to explain. Smaller canopies do not fly and perform the same as bigger canopies, even at a lighter wing loading. Many people learn on a 288 sq ft Manta, regardles of their weight. A 110# student gets the same canopy as the 200# student. That 200# student then graduates onto a smaller canopy, say a 220 Triathlon, which would be appropriate and have flight characteristics that are not so different from the Manta, that a small mistake would quickly become a big problem. Yes, it would have more performance than the Manta, but it would be a gradual change. What do I mean by a small mistake? A low turn to avoid something or get turned into the wind. The Manta is pretty forgiving. The Tri is forgiving as well, but less than the Manta. Now let's look at that 110# student. The get trained on the Manta as well, but new skydivers all hear that a wing loading of 1#/sq ft is OK for new jumpers. That is true, so now that 110# student wants to get a canopy and that 150 sq ft model would give them a very conservative and safe wing loading. What is missing here is the transition. That 150sq ft canopy is not going to fly anything like the 288 sq ft Manta, even at that nice safe wing loading. Now, a small mistake like a low turn to get faced into the wind after just barely making it back from a bad spot, can become fatal. That 150 will do everything faster than the Manta, even with the light wing loading. Some students are fortunate enough to train at DZs that have a variety of student mains and match them better than the one size fits all Manta. Most are not. So, making such a big change is asking for trouble because even though the wing loading may seem approriate, the much smaller canopy will have performance that the new jumper may not be ready to handle. An unexpected situation may cause them to react in such a way that the canopy gets ahead of them and they wind up hurt or dead. I hope my explanation makes this a little clearer. Reread the article by John L. now and I'll bet it all makes nore sense. alan

Poster: skyhawk "froggie i reakon go with sabre 150 :-) ok mayby im a little biased. Alan i dont see why she would have a prob downsizing (not that im saying i know more than u cause i dont)but i downsized from a 240 to a 150 in one and im easily landing them all and am accutally lookin at getting a smaller one and im 5'5 about 136 with gear." Hi Ben, You don't mention what your experience level is so I am going to guess that you are fairly new. Did you read the info in the links I gave froggie? It should answer your question about why she might have a problem downsizing too much too quickly. You could also go here: >http://www.performancedesigns.com/seminars.html< and pay special attention to the seminar titled "Wing Loading and Its Effects". I hope it is new information for you and that you find it helpful. You have to realize that we don't all have the same skills and abilities at any given point in our jumping. You may have a rare natural talent, you may have had exceptional instruction or coaching, or you may have just been lucky up to this point. Just because you have had no problem is no reason to believe that it will be the same for froggie. I hope you can see my logic. Stay safe and have fun. alan

Many stores sell travel luggage that is an approved size for carry on. Mine has wheels and a handle that extends, but many rigs would be too large to fit in it. That would be my only concern, is if the rig and whatever you might put it in was bigger than what the airline allows for carry on. Many are not too strict, but some are. alan

- i assume more manufacturers are not active because they have better things to do than deal with antoganistic posts. I'm sorry you feel my posts are antagonistic, I had hoped they would simply provide some balance and as the moderator of this forum I feel that is one of my reponsibilities. - i offered sangiro to send a demo just the same as anyone else that wants to try one. our demo request form must be filled out, signed and faxed in. Below are cut and pastes of the correspondence between Sangiro, you, and myself. You will see no mention of a faxed demo request form. From Sangiro to me: "Alan, I spoke to Dan Preston. He agreed to work with you to get a demo Cobalt to you for a review on Dropzone.com. I include his email addresses below. Please contact him directly to figure out the details and the logistics. Keep me posted and let me know if there's anything I can do to help make this happen. Dan - thank you for agreeing to do this. We appreciate the opportunity! Dan Preston: atairusa@mail.com Safe swoops Sangiro www.dropzone.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "d preston" To: "sangiro" Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2001 12:22 PM Subject: RE: Cobal Review for Dropzone.com > ------Original Message------ > From: "sangiro" > To: "Dan Preston" > Sent: February 20, 2001 2:50:13 AM GMT > Subject: Cobal Review for Dropzone.com > > > Dan, > > Would you consider making a Cobalt available to Alan Binnebose for review on > Dropzone.com? Alan lives in Wis. Rapids and moderates my Gear and Rigging > forum. He currently jumps an EXTreme VX 89. If you're interested I could > get you guys in contact so you can figure out what the right canopy would be > for Alan to jump. > > I think the Cobalt is an exciting canopy that's creating a lot of buzz and > people would love to read a proper and extensive review on the canopy. > > Let me know what your thoughts are. > > Safe swoops > Sangiro > > www.dropzone.com > > > hi sangiro, > > definately. > > thanks > > sincerely, > > dan > atair > www.xtremefly.com > 718-596-8641 ph" From me to you: "Hi Dan, I am looking forward to jumping the Cobalt and evaluating it. I live in WI and right now the weather is not very conducive to jumping. I am hoping that we could arrange for a canopy some time in late March or early April, as I would like to be able to put at least 15 jumps on it. A rather arbitrary number, but in my experience, it takes me about that to truly start getting a good feel for a canopy beyond first impressions. Also, that should allow you plenty of time to arrange for the canopy and minimize any inconvenience to yourself. I have over 1400 jumps with about 10 years experience. I have varying numbers of jumps on a broad range of canopies marketed in the U.S.. I won't bore you with the list unless you're curious. I am not sure if you would like me to do a head to head type eval of a specific canopy, or take a more general approach. Either is fine with me, comparisons are inevitable but can be misleading as well because of weather conditions, wing loading, etc.. You can get an idea of the type of review I have done in the past at www.Dropzone.com in the gear reviews. I can recall doing one on the VX and on the Talon2. There might be one or two others as well, I can't recall. Sangiro might be able to help out here. I intend to do a fairly extensive review that should improve and expand on my previous examples. The canopies I have jumped most recently besides my own are a Vengeance 107 and a Crossfire 119. You can reach me by e-mail at acbinnebose@tznet.com or by phone at 715-421-3223 or 715-421-3134. I am looking forward to working with you. Please let me know your thoughts and we can decide on a canopy size and dates. Blue Skies, Alan Binnebose D17868" Another rone from me to you: "I am anxious to review the Cobalt for you and the attachment is the correspondence I received and sent regarding this. Thank you in advance for any help or technical information you can provide. Blue Skies, Alan Binnebose D17868" Your reply: "i could not open the attachment, it came accross as gobbly gook below. ps. send me your address and we will be glad to send you literature and a video cd of the high speed openings. sincerely, dan" Again, I never intended to be antagonistic, only to keep the information here factual and balanced. alan

Discuss downsizing with your Instructor/JM. You don't mention what you have been jumping or what your skill, experience, or abilities are. If you have been jumping a student Manta and go to a 150 sq foot canopy without some transitioning, you are asking for trouble. Work your way down in increments. I see from your profile that you are from Williamstown, NJ. You have one of the most experienced and knowledgeable canopy pilots in the country at your disposal. Go to Cross Keys and ask for Mark Kruse. Ask him for advice, he is a great guy and will help you if you ask. Also, there are some very good articles here for you to read, especially those by John LeBlanc and Bryan Burke. http://www.dropzone.com/safety/articles/ alan

Try doing some reading here: http://www.dropzone.com/gear/articles/ I think you will find the answers to your questions and then some. alan

>I jump a Tempo 120 reserve. A reserve, which by the way, packs smaller than a PD 113 There are two reasons a Tempo 120 packs smaller than a PD 113. The PD is more heavily reinforced than the Tempo and is therefore tested and placarded to a higher weight and deployment speed. It is also measured differently and under The PIA standard is 123 square feet, while the Tempo is 120 square feet. The PD 113 is stronger and bigger than the Tempo 120, that is why it has more pack volume. alan

Re: Tempo Reserves [Post#: 13472 / re: 13436 ] >There is ONE standard for sport parachutes in the US - TSO >C23d. The PISA Tempo reserve meets that requirement the >same as PD Reserves etc... There are several standards by which parachutes made in the US for emergency use are manufactured. The most recent is TSO C-23d, although some are still manufactured and placarded under the older TSO C-23c. The minimum performance standards are defined in AS 8015-A, published by the Society of Automotive Engineers. TSO C-23c required canopies to be tested and placarded as Category A: 198 lb/130 knots, Category B: 254 lb/150 knots, or Category C: 254 lb/175 knots. The new TSO C-23d allows for more liberal testing and placarding. As of 1998, Tempo reserves were still being placarded under TSO C-23c Cat.A, which limited them to 198# at 130 knots. Most reserves currently manufactured by PD and Precision are tested and placarded under the newer TSO C-23d and have higher approved weights and deployment speeds, while some are still placarded under TSO C-23c Cat.B with a higher weight and speed limit than the Tempo (254#/150 kts, for example). So, simply stated, while Tempo reserves are a safe and reliable reserve, they do not meet the same requirement as PD Reserves etc..., at least as of Feb. of 1998. alan I have to apologize here and make a correction. I did some checking in the Tempo owners' manual and found that they are actually tested to meet TSO C-23c Cat. B and NOT Cat. A as I have stated above. This means they are tested to 254# at 150 knots. They state that for safety reasons they placard them at the lower weight and speed. Again, I am sorry for posting incorrect information about the Tempo and hope this corrects my mistake. alan Edited by alan on 5/2/01 07:16 PM.

Re: Tempo Reserves [Post#: 13436 / re: 13422 ] >The reason I have been told they are inexpensive is >because PISA makes the F111 fabric, unlike other >manufacturers who have to buy it from a distributor. The fabric used by PISA is made by Gelvenor Textiles of South Africa. alan

It refers to the shape of the freebag in which the reserve canopy is stowed. Think of a molar tooth. The freebag is sewn with webbing in the middle from the grommet out to the edge of the bag, the webbing continues on as the bridle. This forms two pockets on each side of this webbing where the "ears" of the canopy are stowed. When you look at a freebag with a canopy in it, it resembles a molar tooth. alan

According to a recent article in Parachutist (April 2001, page 59), if you get about ten or so openings like this, it is an anomaly and Atair will replace the canopy. An opening hard enough to rip the stitching on the toggle keepers is pretty serious, but not unheard of. I saw it on a Triathlon once, they repaired the riser and provided a video on proper packing. alan

i am not trying to put spins on anything just not argue over comments not in context. >Are you implying that I edited your comments to change the context? canopies lables stating max opening speed are tested only for canopy survival and not if the jumper will sustain injury as a result of that opening. >This might be a good topic to approach the PIA with, if you haven't already, so the standard can be changed to reflect this. Maybe two placarded speeds, the one that the canopy can sustain and the one that the canopy will allow the jumper to sustain. this is very important. doesn't this bother you. it is missleading. >So are many of your comments, that bothers me as well. More input from other manufacurers would be good. It would help keep things in check. most people assume that the rating means it is safe to open up to that figure. >I thought most people understand the rating to mean the canopy has been tested to withstand opening at that speed. Perhaps I have been wrong. It is pretty subjective and I know of no study that would support either of us. for many canopies it is not. >See, you make a claim here. Now support it. What canopies and what are the details. According to the review in Parachutist, even the Cobalt can slam you. Of course that is only if has been wet or is an "anomaly". neck injuries ranging from whiplash to death, detached retina's, etc.. are more common than you would think. >I think they may be fairly common, but then I haven't seen any study that provides reliable information on this. the useful data for determining if a jumper may be harmed by opening force is the force/time curve. i have scans taken on our canopies and many others, there are distint differences between canopies. some are good, some less, and some are unsafe. the genie is out of the bag so to speak. >If you have real evidence of unsafe canopies and don't share it, who are you helping? Perhaps your evidence would not withstand the scrutiny of a lawsuit. almost every major parachute and container manufacture at the pia asked asked us to quote them on an sdas. >What manufacturers and who were the actual representatives? we are building them now for other manufacturers to help offset the hugh initial r&d cost to design and build, but mainly also because it will create a level playing field. instead of manufacturers advertising un substantiated claims >The first canopy addressing the needs of freeflyers. Max deployment speed 160mph >a peak decelleration of about 6 Gs, significantly less than many other modern skydiving canopies ....are a few examples that come to mind. or saying if your canopy opens hard you must be packing wrong.... >We all know who does this. I know of one company that calls it an anomaly. jumpers will have empirical data on the differences between products to make up their own mind. Atair has deliberatly not published scans yet (but definately our sdas has been demonstrated and data shown to people in the industry) as we are in the process of involving individuals and associations for further tests. i do not want any posibility for someone to point bias, or create a situation where a more powerful company in the industry could come in and steal our thunder so to speak. additionally there is still allot of work left to be done. medically what force/time is acceptable is still a bit grey. we are inferring from studies done in the automobile industry and some military parachute studies...etc...we want i think its funny that you think i am putting out "puffery" >I don't think it is funny and I substantiated it. i try to be educational in my posts and of course being with atair, i cant post without it being at least a slight plug. but i would think this is more good than not. wouldn't you like to see all manufacturers active on this list. i think we all stand to learn allot. >Yes, I would like to see more manufacurers active in this forum. We could all benefit and it would provide some balance. demo's: fax in a demo' request off our home page and the office will schedule it for you. >No thanks. You gave Sangiro your word and I would expect you to keep it without me having to now fax in a request. alan

hi alan, in my last post i was trying to explain that the labels are tests of max conditions for canopy survival, they do not take into consideration if the resulting opening force/time exceeds safe levels to subject a jumper. atair is trying to change this. this is not an antagonistic jab at other manufacturers , but rather our passion and effort to make the sport safer. >Fair enough, but what we were talking about were placarded speed limitations and your comments on such. I cut and pasted them here with no editing and did not change the context of either my question or your answer. compare apples to apples. if we go by convention we could rate the max deployment speed of the cobalt grossly higher. we do not because i have trouble with the ethics involved in allowing a jumper to have a false sense of security by thinking it is safe for their canopy to deploy at a speed that may seriously injure them. >Fine, but the industry standard is and has been to placard the canopy at tested opening speeds that the canopy can withstand and most jumpers realize this and do not have a false sense of security. as far as crossfire jumping, i would love to have someone jump it with our SDAS (skydiving data acquisition system) and test it safely (ie. a series of jumps deploying at progressively higher speeds). >I would love to do this for you. In reponse to an e-mail from Sangiro, you said you would love to send me a canopy to evaluate and write an article on. I followed up on that with my own e-mail, but now you want me to request a demo from your web-site. If you would like, I would be happy to post all of the correspondence here to refresh your memory. the beauty of using an sdas is that there is nothing subjective, all relevant data is exactly sensed and recorded. when i said how many people want to pop their safire in a fast stand, i was just being cute. sometimes i forget that tone does not always read right when quickly typing emails. but we have tested 2 safires by letting other jumpers use our sdas. we have let allot of people jump our sdas at various dz's so we can look at the results and show our equipment. i have 4 'scans' of 2 different safires, not nearly enough for a scientific study, but based on what was recorded i wouldn't want anyone dumping one in a fast stand. >OK. Send me one. I'll test it on the Crossfire as well. I'll need your action plan with wingloading information, testing conditions, etc. alan

I've been trying to get this message across to Dan, without much success. As Dan himself suggested, I wish other manufacturers would use this forum to disseminate information, it would be better for all and there would be less innuendo, half truths, and misleading information about canopies and canopy design being spread around. alan

Donna, you don't need to sell your one pin CYPRES, it can be converted to two cutters. No big deal, contact Cliff at SSK. alan

That would be or was a mistake unless they plan(ned) the jump as an intentional cutaway with a tertiary reserve. Nylon left in the sun and weather for a year is not airworthy and a responsible rigger would know this. alan