alan

The Voodoo by Rigging Innovations is also Tested to TSO C-23D alan

I would suggest demoing each canopy and decide on which one you like the best after jumping them yourself. I know it can be a pain sometimes waiting for a demo canopy, but it is worth it. If the manufacturer is slow, sometimes you can get one quicker from a dealer, try different avenues. If you can make Quincy, you will be able to demo them side by side. They are both great canopies and after having jumped both it would be difficult for me to say one is far better than the other. They both have many attributes, you need to jump them and see which ones fit your likes the best. Good luck. BTW, FWIW, I have heard some very favorable things about the Cobalt and it may be worth considering as well. alan

Dan, I said you said something. You said you did't recall the conversation and that you would not have said what I claimed you did. I cut and pasted a portion of our e-mail exchange that showed what you actually said. Now you want to put a different spin on it. As far as the tests with the SDAS goes, as you pointed out previously, Gary Peek and Dr. Jean Potvin tested a variety of canopies (PD) and found them to have about the same forces on the jumper as what you have stated the Cobalt does according to the article they published in Skydiving Magazine #224. You stated that "early tests show show his company's canopies show a peak dedeleration of about 6 Gs, significantly less than many other modern skydiving canopies." In the same issue, in the article by Peek and Potvin, they state "Our measurements have shown that on average, sport canopies tend to generate opening shocks averaging in the 3- to 6-G level after a skydive performed at terminal velocity. Hard (fast) and painful openings have been documented at about 9 to 12 G's in about one second." You may indeed have a passion and effort to make the sport safer, but it appears you also have a passion to sell Cobalt canopies and are willing to engage in a lot of "puffery" and misleading claims to do so. From what I have seen and heard about the Cobalt, it is a fine canopy and it will stand very well on its' performance and probably sell alot better without the type of pitching I have seen. I had hoped to get the opportunity to evaluate one personally after you promised Sangiro via e-mail that you would be happy to send me one to review for a feature article here in Dropzone.com, but you seem to have forgotten that as well. It is probably a moot issue now that Parachutist did such a good review. I was very glad to see that and wish they would do it more often. alan

I use Woolite and do it by hand in the bath tub, me and the rig get clean at the same time. I then pat it dry with towels (special attention to hardware), like a sweater, then hang it to air dry completely. As stated earlier by DB, be sure to RINSE thoroughly. An older, grungy looking rig can look almost new and will make much more appealling to a potential buyer, if you are selling a rig. alan

Dan here is a cut and paste of the relevant portion from your e-mail to me. "Hi Dan, This last Sat I was asked to take a look at a Cobalt 150 that was less than 1 year old. The placard read max. deployment speed 130 kts. As a rigger, I was questioned as to why your ads state the following: "The Atair COBALT is the first canopy addressing the needs of free flyers. Max deployment 160 mph.", when 130 kts is about 150 mph. My response was that I didn't know and would have to e-mail you for an answer. -that cobalt was manufactured before we completed our higher speed testing and as such has an old label. In the meantime, I decided to see what information your web-site had to offer and came across this statement: "Main canopies are designed for maximum deployment speeds of 120 knots and below." My Icarus canopies are placarded at 150 kts, well above 160 mph. I am curious about what main canopies you are referring to. -pd canopies are specified at 120. additionally from what i have been told icarus canopies may be labeled higher but have not been tested to 150." We have several Crossfires at the DZ and they all said they would be willing to open with you any time any way and that you should bring along a lot of beer with you. alan

Dan Preston of Atair replied that the Cobalt I had observed to be placarded at 130 kts was made before they had tested the canopies to 160 mph. In response to the Icarus canopies being placarded at 150 kts, which is higher than the 160 mph of the Cobalt, he said he had "heard" that they are not tested to that speed. I asked him what canopies they were referring to with their claim that other mains are designed for 120 kts deployment, his only reply was PD. I checked several Sabres and they were placarded at 130 kts, I checked a new Vengeance and it was 120 kts. I will do some follow up with both PD and Icarus. alan

In response to: Poster: FallRate Subject: Re: Rig Choice "if you are interested in the Voodoo you need to be comfortable with a 150 main or smaller." A Voodoo will accomodate up to a 170 main/reserve. alan

froggie, there are some great articles right here in Dropzone.com. Try looking in GEAR for a start and then just do some surfing, you will be amazed at the amount of information and links that we have right here. alan

In response to: "Incidentally, the Atair web site claims the cobalt is the only canopy rated up to 160 mph deployment speed, but the patch on my Safire says 150 knots, which is about 172 mph???" I just looked at the placard on a one year old Cobalt 150 last Saturday and it read max. deployment speed 130kts. That is about 150mph. I too have seen the 160mph claim on their web-site and adds. I think i will e-mail them for an explanation. alan

Hi guys, Nice to see you sharing good information. Just a friendly reminder though, for non-gear/rigging related stuff, the DZ.com has some nice features like private e-mail and messages. Hope you have good weather and lot'a fun. alan

In response to: Poster: Geoff Subject: Re: Overloading Reserves "For instance, the PD 126 reserve is rated to 254 pounds, but the Raven 135-M is only rated to 182 pounds." Good replies by Geoff and skybytch. I just want to clarify one thing though. What Geoff is referring to as 'rated' is what the canopy is placarded at. Each canopy is tested to a specific TSO and a category within that TSO, but is not necessarily placarded at the limits to which it was tested. Precision has chosen a more conservative approach in the placarded limits of its'Dash-M canopies. alan

In response to: Poster: Aviatrr Subject: Re: "Dream" First Rig "I don't think you're going to find a round certified under TSO 23(c) - the most recent TSO.. I believe they are all 23(a) and (b).. Alan - you would probably know more about that specific subject - anything to add?" The most recent TSO is TSO-C23d. It allows for more liberal weight and speed restrictions than TSO-C23c, but with more rigid testing procedures (as I understand it). Under TSO-C23c, there were three Test Categories which specified the maximum placarded weight and speed of the canopy. Category A: 198lb/130knots, Cat.B: 254lb/150knots, and Cat.C: 254lb/175knots. The Strong LO-PO round reserves are manufactured under TSO-C23c, Category B. I don't know the specifics of the new TSO-C23d as I don't have a copy of the AS 8015-A, which is the specification the FAA accepted for defining minimum performance standards for emergency parachutes. It is issued by the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc. At best all of this is confusing. "Most reserves are certified to 130knots, which is about 150mph.. " Some are certified to 150knots. The best route is to verify the placarded limitations before making a decision as to what is right 'for you'. Example: Micro Raven-Maa 135 is placarded at 150knots/182lbs and a Tempo 150 is placarded at 130knots/165lbs. I personally don't believe there is anything "wrong" with a Tempo, but you should know what you are getting for your dollar and if it will meet your needs. "My main point was that people knock certain reserves for nothing more than 'brand loyalty' or just the fact that they were always told that was the best.." I have to agree, many of the people out there giving advice on reserves, have never jumped one.....not all, but many. And even those who have jumped one are usually basing their advice on one or two rides. Want good advice on reserves? Talk to an experienced CRW dog, that discipline usually affords more opportunities to jump your reserve. I hope this helped, a little anyway. alan

In response to: Poster: SkySlut Subject: Re: "Dream" First Rig "The risers are "anti-twist" risers. They have a tubing inside them so it is going to take much more effort to put you into a line twist rather than a traditional riser which is just webbing." Actually, the tubing has nothing to do with this. The purpose of the tube is to cover and protect the ends of the cutaway cables, so that in the event of severe line twists, which twist up the risers, the cable ends do not become pinched in the risers and cause a hard/impossible cutaway. Some manufacturers, such as Rigging Innovations and Relative Workshop, offer hard riser inserts that are similar to the hard housings on the reserve and cutaway systems. The one offered by Sunpath is a type of plastic that they say meets TSO specifications. alan

This is a moderated forum and so when the posts stray from gear related issues or degenerate into personal attacks, abusiveness, etc., I will take whatever action I feel is appropriate under the circumstances. alan

When I assemble my main onto the slinks/links, I just slip a couple of small rubber bands (same as for line stows) over my risers, above the toggles. Just s fold the excess brake line under the rubber band. alan

IMHO the Cypres solves more problems than it causes... The RSL causes more problems than it solves. Fair enough, but a review of the USPA fatality reports seems to indicate that while the RSL has caused some problems, it, like the CYPRES, has saved far more than it has hurt. Comparing CYPRES to RSL is like comparing apples to oranges in many senses, except they are both intended to be life saving back-up devices and should never be depended upon. As far as I know, the CYPRES has never failed to fire within its' designed operating parameters, with a resulting loss of life. It has "saved" hundreds, but has also 'misfired', that is why for a while they had the 'sleeve'. I personally witnessed one fire in an aircraft when a cell phone was being used to order a pizza. The RSL does not enjoy as good of a record as the CYPRES and has been shown to have caused several fatalities. I might add that in at least one recent one though, it was only speculation. I also would like to add that the root cause was generally not the RSL, but a defective, overloaded, or older non-reinforced type 17 riser. The early Racer design, with the cross connector also caused some problems....an offshoot of the old Steven's Lanyard. The RWS, about a year or two ago, introduced the Collin's Lanyard for its' tandem rigs. A failsafe RSL. Why it has not become the industry standard, I cannot fathom. If a riser fails, it ensures that the other one, and therefore both, are released, prior to reserve activation. It is not a cross connector as found on the older Racers or the Steven's system. It won't foul or choke off the reserve. I can only guess it is because the RWS seems to share your opinion that experienced jumpers should not use an RSL. They seem to have backed off on this a bit recently, as evidenced that they now offer the RSL as an option on the Vector. alan

Skreamer, yes, sorry. When I reponded to SkySlut, I was mistakenly thinking that his/her post was made by you. I recalled your thread from the "old" forum. Since I was thinking it was your post, I incorrectly also attributed the comment to you. I am having a little difficulty adjusting to this new format. alan

I just thought I'd add this here as well. I received via e-mail in response to a post I made in rec.skydiving on this question. Here is the cut and paste: Alan, I saw your rather detailed post on the merits of Spectra and Vectran. Interestingly enough, it turns out that sail makers use mono-filament fibers, like Spectra and Vectran, to carry the loads in sails. Below is a breakdown of properties for Spectra and Vectran, taken from the July/August 1997 issue of "Sailing World" magazine. Take note that these properties are for a given denier, and will not correlate exactly to a combination of fibers, such as a braid used in a suspension line. The results are interesting though, and generally reinforce what skydivers already know or are finding out. What jumps out at me are the values for "flex life" and "UV resistance". There appears to be a substantial difference in the two fibers in these areas, but I have yet to hear this mentioned in the context of skydiving. *******************Begin Quote******************* SPECTRA Initial modulus = 1250 Tenacity = 33.5 Flex life = not affected UV resistance = 6 to 7 months Elongation to break = 5% VECTRAN Initial modulus = 510 Tenacity = 23.0 Flex life = 15% UV resistance = 1 to 2 months Elongation to break = 2% Where ... "Initial modulus" is a measure of the fiber's ability to resist stretch. The higher the number, the less the stretch. "Tenacity" is a measure of initial breaking strength. The higher the number, the more load it takes to break the fiber. "Flex life" is a measure of the fibers ability to retain its strength after being folded back and forth. It is expressed as a percentage of the fabrics strength lost after 60 bend cycles. "UV resistance" is the amount of time it takes for the fiber to lose 50% of its initial modulus. "Elongation to break" is a measure of the fibers ability to resist shock loads. It is a measure of how much a fiber will stretch before it breaks. Spectra has a weird characteristic when it is highly stressed - it "creeps" - which is essentially permanent stretch. Spectra has superb durability; it doesn't mind flex, sunlight, or chafe. Vectran ... suffers more in sunlight. Unlike Spectra it does not creep, but it's also very expensive. *******************End Quote******************* blues, Andy I would like to make a note here that while this article refers to Spectra "creep" as a permanent stretch, what happens in the parachute suspension line application is that it reacts to the heat generated by the slider and deployment forces by permanently shrinking. alan

So - I'd be interested in opinions on the following: (1) Do the thicker (1000lb?) vectran lines which Icarus now install as brake lines really improve things? Yes, but the real question is how much do they improve things. I am not sure. (2) Why not use Spectra just for the lower control line section? This shouldn't affect the trim very much. (not my idea - I read it on rec.skydiving) Probably my post. I have replaced my lower brake lines with Spectra after discussing it with an Icarus rep. I am happy with the results. She said we may see this from the factory sometime soon. I guess time will tell. (3) Is the improvement in trim from Vectran significant, even for very high performance canopies, or are we just becoming victims of the latest fashion? Spectra appears to be superior to Vectran in all but one category, it does not retain its' original length as well. Line trim is indeed critical to some of todays high performance canopies, but in varying degrees, not all. My opinion is that Spectra would be the better(safer) choice if jumpers could be relied on to replace lines at the recommended intervals. Unfortunately, we can't. We tend to replace them when they 'look' really bad or the canopy starts to fly and perform extremely poorly. This would generally be too late on some of todays extremely high performance canopies. With Vectran, they look like crap after 200 - 300 jumps, and so we replace them. alan

"Firstly I should say that while I'm Pro-RSL for students, I'm anti RSL for anyone off student status. My reasons for this are that there is ONLY ONE WAY to activate your reserve, that's by pulling your reserve handle!" Mike, I am curious, do you have a CYPRES? "If the Cypres had been invented 15 years earlier then we wouldn't be having this discussion - The RSL would never have been developed" They serve two very different purposes. See my previous post. alan

My bad, I confused you with skreamer with respect to the previous posting. My current rigs both have RSLs. I used to have a CYPRES in one of them until my daughter started jumping, I transferred it into her rig then. Another rig safety item worth looking into would be the hard riser inserts for the cutaway cable ends. I have a new rig on order that will have them. If I am satisfied, I will likely install them on my other rigs as well as on my daughter's. I am sorry for the posting mix up. alan

"3)Worst case scenario, you have your AAD. I know that they can malfunction, so can RSLs. So I jump like I dont have either of them on my rig. If you dont have one, get one...thats my opinion." I wrote you a rather lengthy reply in the "old" forum that apparently got lost when Sangiro made the recent change. Bummer! This thinking is so scary that I have to reply again here. The RSL and AAD(CYPRES) serve two completely different purposes and one is NOT a substitute for the other! The RSL is designed to help save you in the event of a low cutaway, regardless of the reason, be it loss of altitude awareness during a malfunction, slow response to the malfunction, a hard cutaway, etc. There are times its' use is not recommended such as doing video, skysurfing, CRW, some really big ways. There are times you want to disconnect it under canopy such as landing with high ground winds, landing in water or a canopy wrap after colliding with another jumper. The RSL will NOT help you in the event of a no pull. The AAD(CYPRES) is designed to help save you if you do not deploy your main by approximately 750' agl. Again, it does not care why. It MAY help save you in the case of a low cutaway IF you have climbed above 1500' agl before exiting the aircraft and you cut away high enough to reach a vertical descent rate of 78 mph before 130' agl and assuming your reserve canopy has time to inflate and decellerate you before impact. It may also deploy your reserve in a low pull scenario and actually endanger you with the resulting two canopy out situation. You can even "fool" it into firing at much higher than the publicized altitude of 750'. The manufacturer states that it can fire as high as 1050' and that this can be caused by a snivelling opening. Having an AAD and/or RSL and then jumping like you don't have them is foolish. The AAD is an active decision making device. You have to be aware of what it will and won't do under various circumstances and have emergency procedures that account for the limitations of the device. The RSL is not an active device like the CYPRES, but you still must be aware of it and the circumstances you are in. You are VERY correct about one thing though, AADs and RSLs are not a substitute for safety procedures. I hope the additional information I have posted here is of some benefit to you. Maybe if you e-mail Sangiro, he can access and share my last post to you in this thread on the old forum. It was very similar, but maybe better done. Try this link: http://dropzone.com/gear/articles/ You will find some articles on this subject and more, that you should find informative and helpful. have fun and be safe alan alan