JanuszPS

On my first FT50 I had some similar problem. I just noticed that in my group of jumpers there was always one person pulling very low every time. I have noticed that was me What happened was that after one day when I hit the door by the alti after couple of weeks one of the screws inside the alti fell out and went under the vacuum box creating additional pressure on the box. This resulted in about 200m added altitude during freefall. As a result I was pulling about 200 m lower that others accidentally. After I realized there is a problem, I just opened the box, found the problem/loose screw, screw it to the place and the alti worked perfect till friend of mine lost it during one jump. Now I have another FT60. Look inside and check if there is something wrong. If it's broken it's broken so you don't risk much. I should have some pictures somewhere. j. Back to Poland... back home.

Did you come back to jumping after it? Compressed/fractured vertebra Th6 in the free fall collision (got hit to my back while I was dearching). Still recovering from it after 8 mts and count also broken rib and whiplashed neck after an exploding opening - out for 3 mts j. Back to Poland... back home.

hi, for the answer look up into wingsuit section. I use to have the same gear for all jumps, but now I have two sets of gear for FF/FS and WS jumps mainly due to the canopy size and harness fit differences. In terms of the gear choice... I'm from Europe and I've had the same problem at the beginning. jumping in Ireland where the market is tiny was even more difficult to get a decent beginner gear. So I bought my first system online in ..... Germany. Omega M with 170 Cayenne incl AAD and Smart reserve for just above E 3300. I have put in the container 170 and 150 (Sabre 2) w/o problem (system AFAIK is max for 190 so the 150 was quite loose with the shortest loop). My impression is that the European brands don't keep the value as much as the US made stuff (mostly due to marketing reason) and they are as good as any others. So sometimes is good to buy the non US canopy for example (no choice than European stuff in terms of AAD though ;-) I agree that if you don't have any close friends travelling to US who would bring the gear for you, it is difficult to get cheaper gear, specially brand new. The point is that everything (including second hand gear) will be taxed if coming from outside the EU (European Union) at approx 25% of the declared value or the invoice. That's the reason why most of the European jumpers buying outside EU are asking the sellers to lower the declared value, which sometimes for lack of understanding by the sellers, is taken as cheating on US customs/government (which obviously is not a case). Thankfully there in the US are also some reasonable ppl who don't have any problem with declaring lower value (including some shops as well). You can always make a deal/agreement with the seller that if the gear is not up to your expectations or doesn't fit properly will be sent back and the money will be returned. I bought 3/4 rigs online without any issues (well, major issues). More than likely if you buy a container for 170 9 cell ZP the 135 9 cell ZP might be too loose. If you buy a container for 150 the 170 would be very difficult to pack (unless 7 cell or hybrid) and 135 will be fine. Have you looked up on UK, French, Dutch, German and other forums for the 2nd hand offers? I can pm you some links if you wish. I agree with plenty of experienced jumpers to buy as the first gear second-hand system and spend the money on jumps. I also agree with one opinion above that in some time soon (lets say within 2 years) you will be seating in a plane to Florida for some skydiving tour, which would be a great opportunity for shopping around. Europe is a bloody expensive place to live and jump ;-) regards j. Back to Poland... back home.

Just in case of bad name related to openings... I disagree with that opinion based on my experience. Well I have only owned and jumped three sizes of Cobalts and there might always be someone saying that this in not enough to build an opinion on. My first Cobalt was 135 which I jumped for about 200 jumps @ 1.40 WL - one extremely hard opening but related to shrunk lines (shorter by about 8-10 cm) and one chop (severe line twist on my back) caused by packing - all on normal jumps. Later I moved to 120 @ 1.6 WL which I used for my first WS jump ever. My the sweetest and the hardest WS opening so far on that canopy caused by packing. But in general a great canopy which I take for WS jumps very rarely as I have a second (safer) system build specifically for WS with Cobalt 150 @ 1.3 WL. The best, softest opening canopy on a WS comparing to my previous SA 2 150 which has given some line twists... I have several tunnel hours so I belief that my body position is good enough to not be a major issue while opening the canopy, however I know that I'm not perfect and maybe I'm very bad ... don't know ;-). I have to admit that the Sabre2 was very stable in line twists though, so I didn't care much about them while flying WS. Based on twist which I got on Cob 150 I am very confident that the canopy is also stable in line twist on my WS jumps. My personal opinion is that the Cobalts (at least those 4 which I have jumped on) are in general very good and nice canopies. Based on my experience I recommend everyone to go for some canopy coaching to be on the safe side. Easy to handle and pack due to gelvenor fabric, requiring a little work to find the way to pack it the way they give the sweetest openings. I love flying them every second, great to learn landings. Fantastic to get back from long spot (which I have had trouble on sinking Sabre2). As a matter of fact I made some very boring vid with all recorded openings which I have. Please note that some of them were affected by the fact I had the camera on my head (135) first time ever (riser strike to the cam box with PC1000) causing a little unsymmetrical openings and were done after one hard opening resulting in neck problems ( I still was not perfectly ok at that time). In terms of openings the only problems were on my 135 (it was a little tricky comparing friend's one which I also jumped). The vid is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZ-lw83XxbE I think the OP will like his canopy and will stick to the brand/type of the canopy. BTW I'm looking for a Cc 105 to downsize from 120 for/after the next season. Optionally Demon 100, Radical 105 (just to jump canopies made of gelvenor). regards j Edit to ad that the 150 is which I refer to line twists on WS jumps. No line twists on 120 so far. In case of OP on 1.5 WL on elliptical canopy on a WS is high so the line twists can result in something more serious Back to Poland... back home.

I also have experienced a great service from Chutingstar. Taking into account that I live in Poland and the shop lowered the $ on the invoice to save my money which I didn't pay for the customs/VAT (for all goods entering EU) about 25%. So I always try to buy there. j. Back to Poland... back home.

Phantom 2 - I bought one 2nd hand and I love it. I made about 50 jumps on it, couple of rodeo jumps from TurboFinnist and still have a lot to learn on it. it's great to experiment. Never tried more advanced though, but I hope to check them out soon. j. Edit: BTW it's my first own WS and I don't regret it. Back to Poland... back home.

thanks for post Ralf (Rafal), stupid comments mean nothing. j. Back to Poland... back home.

really funny, tell me where do you jump in Ireland. IPC, SI or WG? j. Back to Poland... back home.

It was created by a news paper/magazine, so I wouldn't rely on that too much. However the plane was rather hold in the air making circles 3x than what you said made a circle approach. In terms of weather there was very thick fog. j. edit: no point to post here by myself as I'm not a pilot or specialist in that area by any means. Back to Poland... back home.

As per recent assumptions/speculations/informations (pls choose preferred option): The fatal approach was in fact the first or at most the second. Before that the pilots decided to make 3 or 4 rounds/circles around the airport at higher altitude. Another thing is that probably the pilots were speaking in Russian with the control tower and as per control tower crew there were problems with exchanging information using the numbers (altitude info). Howere it might not be sustained as the pilot has known Russian on (very) good level. A new version of simulation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnPh7cTnPcs&feature=player_embedded unfortunately the description is in Polish, but the picture is quite clear. regards j. Back to Poland... back home.

It appeared that one of our skydiving girls who was a crew member died in the accident. blue sky j. Back to Poland... back home.

both black boxes should answer those questions. Hope joined Russian-Polish commission will be made to answer them. the other thing is, that two from three the most important people stayed in in the country, so the country is not paralysed. There were several parliamentarians. Also the Army chief and all chiefs of headquarters died in the accident. j. Back to Poland... back home.

Yes, it is very unfortunate tragedy, and Yes that so many important people should never fly together in one plane. But Yes again, that what you have highly depend on this what you can afford. So they were using what they had. There was recently very loud debate (for couple of years) that a new fleet for VIP officials should be bought, now I think the decision will be much, much easier to be made by the politics and supported by the nation. Another thing is that we had two planes. The crashed one was fully serviced just a year ago, including new avionics, however the place where there suppose to land wasn't equipped with any sophisticated system. the weather was very bad. the second one is at the moment servicing and going though all the modifications. the guy from Polish TV unauthorised entered the crash zone and made all those pictures which were displayed all over the world. before that he heard from his hotel room a noise of the engines of the landing plane. He described them as not typical and strange. Maybe a combination of some technical problems and bad weather was a reason. But we don't know yet. political context: there were advised to land in Minsk but they did not try to land there. Recently we do not have very good relations, I would even say very tense relations with Belarus, due to the persecute of the Polish minority. There is still dictatorship over there and loudly speaking about democracy minority is not very welcome. So they might not want to land for that reason. historical context: It is also important to put this in the historical context of the reason of that journey. there suppose to be a mass made in the honour and respect to 11k (from total of 22k) Polish officers killed/murdered by the red army (by shot in the head) in April 1940 in Katyn - it's 70th anniversary. So they might be very determined to attempt to land over there... Many still belief that Russians even after all those years didn't give us all the information about the murder. I fully understand the families of the murdered officers in Katyn and the President's support to fully uncover the truth as my grandfather was killed in one of the Soviet prisons and grandmother was sent to Siberia to die in one of the camps but fortunately she escaped. It looks that Katyn reminded it's dark face to us Polish again. regards januszps Back to Poland... back home.

I know that this is a little pain in the a... with Nikons, but I use modified N40 with wired bite switch. picture(s) attached. If interested I can contact anyone who wants to modify the camera with the guy who makes that (Europe/Poland). regards JanuszPS edit: to ad the pics ;-) Back to Poland... back home.

I just wonder where Vision would be placed. I jumped it once the "same" size as my Cobalt 120 and in my opinion that canopy was smaller in size, more responsive and the recovery arc was shorter. As a side note, is the H-mod in cobalts affecting the recovery arc or just openings and dive? I think about modifying my sweet cob 120 just to get longer dive/recovery arc from it. It opens already long enough (900ft) that anything longer would be scary. any advice would be appreciated. j. Back to Poland... back home.

Great picture. thnx for your answer. I presume that on lower WL the input necessary to get decent dive similar to the smaller/heavier loaded canopies needs to be much greater. 3'' pull on fronts might not be enough for 150 @ 1.25 or lower WL. As a side note on my Cobalt 120 I can experiment and learn a lot during approach and flare time including some gentle curve landings (not so deep as on your pic though). j. Back to Poland... back home.

Ian, I have asked if others have had the same issue with their canopies, not what causes the bucking. So it's not really answered. j. Back to Poland... back home.

Yep, I know what you are talking about. It is a valid point. Once thinking about solution to my problem I took into consideration that option, but at some point I think that buying a new set of risers for particular canopy depending on bucking or not bucking properties of the canopy is not really right. New risers is about $160-220 range. And I believe that most of the canopies on the market are design for the most typical riser's length which is 20/21'' on most containers. So my question is still not answered if other owners do have that problem? Or maybe most people do not care about bucking or do not use fronts for approach? Usually exploring my problem I was observing others flying Sa2 and I noticed that it wasn't only my canopy bucking. Obviously not everything is noticeable from significant distance >300ft etc, ans not everybody is making deep dive for landing so that's why I'm asking here. regards j. Back to Poland... back home.

Thanks for the answer. although I know what is causing the bucking effect. My only problem was that the steering lines length should be adjusted to get the most optimum from the flare part of the landing. So increasing the lines I was suffering from not finished flare - there was still power in the canopy which I couldn't translate to forward move. So no matter what I was doing there was something always wrong (270 jumps on the lines that time). So my question is if other owners have had the same problem that they couldn't get a perfect length for the landings (flare) and the front dives as that was the case with both mentioned canopies. thanks J. BTW I fly Cobalt 120, 150 and just after Sa2 150 I moved to Cob 135 and there was no problem at all with the steering lines length - all was perfect in that matter after adjustment to fit my arms length. But they are elliptical so I presume there is no problem due to reduced tail length. Edit just to add I'm really care about fully extending my arms and fully shut down the canopy at the flare end. And generally I don't have not-finished flare problem ;-) Back to Poland... back home.

In my opinion it is not true and I will explain why later on. But shortly - by pulling down the risers you are bypassing the pinned connection - three rings, so the point of rotation is no longer in that place as all forces are not crossing the same point. Point of rotation is a place against which the system (body) under external forces and internal reactions rotate. Simply by pulling down the rear risers "theoretically" you can fully unload the rear risers from the three ring point to your hands and forget about that part of the risers. I'm saying theoretically as I don't know what sort of forces we are talking about. By removing or limiting that connection the point of rotation is moved thus the centre point of mass can be moved forward/backward in respect to the canopy. I might prepare some drawing when I find some free time. j. I advice to look into some mechanics book to understand what I'm talking about. Edit: the change might be very small (due to high loads) or very limited due to the no-rigid nature of the wing "wasting" all effort - I don't know. Back to Poland... back home.

Simply outstanding service. two orders so far but I'm sure more coming in the future. janusz Back to Poland... back home.

Only when you add some input with your hands on the toggles/rear risers into the equation. Otherwise no matter what you do below the pinned connection doesn't really matter*. That's how I see it. j. Edit *Excluding drag effect. Back to Poland... back home.

What was yours experience with using fronts for landings? The same question can be put to Ian as a very experienced pilot? Any buckling problems while on fronts? In my case Sa2 150 was buckling - on two different ones of the same size. Mine with 400 jumps on the lines and another brand new. I think that Sa 2 is nice but far from perfection based on my experience as an owner of 150 loaded @ 1.25. But maybe I made not enough jumps ;-) to learn how to pack it as I made only 100+. there was always some issue with turns once to the right and once to the left but not more than 90 deg. Not a big deal. Also closed end cells - not a real problem. Maybe one or two hard openings - nothing comparing to a really hard one which I got on different canopy. Forgetting the buckling effect Sabre 2 was a good choice to learn the landings - flare part of it. It is also good canopy for WS but overall I prefer a Cobalt of the same size (150). j. Edit: +1 for second hand first canopy Back to Poland... back home.

Exactly. It is the basics of mechanics/static rule that all forces applied at one point do not generate momentum and the forces are balanced, the sum of all forces is equal 0. Otherwise the system is in movement (which is not the case in this situation as the body is in stable position in respect to local coordinate system). So without applying additional "connection"=force between the body and the upper system bypassing the original connection point (pinned connection - a hinge) there is no possibility to act on the upper system - risers (above the pinned connection point - three rings). That's why when loosing the chest strap and moving upper body forward swoopers use the rear risers not only to steer/plane out the canopy but also to support themselves/to keep balance - they have to introduce additional force to keep suspended body in "initially imbalanced" position. That's how I understand that. j. Back to Poland... back home.

Agree. That what is show on my simplify drawing. Upper: perfectly symmetrical object in balance. Lower: unbalanced object moving to balanced position. It is possible by moving the body's/object's forward/backward to move the CG point out of the centre position with the condition that additional force is introduced to the system (such as arms pushing down the rear risers which means "slightly lifting up"/unloading or simply supporting the body at some point and keeping the pilot in balanced position). I'm not a swooper so I might be wrong... j. Edit: to load the picture. The semi-rigid connection needs to balance eccentrically located load which is the object with moved centre point of gravity. (In fact that could be described in equation) Back to Poland... back home.