morris

Competitions is what I´m talking about. I´m loading this high on all of my jumps for training reasons. I´m doing about 500 Velocity landings per year and at least 50% of those are teamvideojumps I don´t wanna waste...

Hi again, a while ago I asked here for opinions about Velo96 at 2.4 versus Velo 90 at 2.55 and the majority of opinions recommended the 96 for anything except strong headwinds. (We´re talking here about distance.) Now I´ve been on a scale again and realised I gained almost 10 pounds. Therefore it´s now 96 at 2.49 vers 90 at 2.65. I did some jumps with the 90 (those were with cameras at 2.68) and the same linetype as my 96 (HMA300). Those landings where a lot of fun (liked the speed) but I´m now even more sure than before that the 96 is the right choice. The combination of the not too small wing with the loading of almost exactly 2.5 seems to me to be kind of perfect. Thoughts on that? Thanks, Morris

Hi guys (and girls), during the weekend I had the possibility to put some jumps on the new PD Optimum Reserve and I thought maybe someone might be interested what impressions I got. I have an overall of 16 cut-aways and therefore some experience with different types and seizes of reserves under real conditions. First I´d like to tell you what I think about the "normal" reserves on the market and take it from there... To name some of the reserves I jumped so far (I might be missing some): Raven 3 (ok that´s a main, it has just been used as a reserve in that rig), Microraven, Quick (from the german manufacturer Performances Variable, now the company is called Firebird), Techno (Parachutes de France), Speed 2000 (from the german manufacturer Paratec), PD-R; Out of those the PD-R is by far the best one out there to me. The only other reserve that comes close is the Speed, the "rest of the pack" is far behind. An experienced pilot will be fine with the PD-R even if it`s loaded VERY high (as long as he isn`t unconcious). The highest loading I´ve landed it with was about 2.1! I remember my very first cut-away with a PD-R taking place in Eloy a couple of years ago right over the main landing area. Due to the perfect spot I went for an accuracy landing and was overshooting my target at landing a bit cause the flare of the PD-R was so much more powerful than I expected... very nice! Now to the Optimum: I jumped the 126 doing videojumps and been loading it ( with all the camerastuff and the 10 pounds I gained over last winter for swooping reasons :-) ) 1.9 The control range is outstanding! The stall point was almost out of reach for me and I got long arms! The wing stays VERY stable even in deepest brakes (like it would be the tiny little son of me BlackJack 280). If´ve been doing anything from straight-in student landings to 450s and anything has been very sweet. In addition we´ve been doing team formation landings and I´ve been able to fly my slot in the formation (I´m usually using a Velo96 for this) with anything around my from Stiletto120 to Katana97! Awesome! Let me know if you got any more questions and please tell me if you already been jumping an Optimum in a real emergency or at least one that´s been packed like a reserve cause I now only know about the openings if it´s packed like a main (those are nice, fast AND soft). Thanks for any information on that... Morris

SkydiveLillo/Spain Accuracy

You could create kind of an accuracy event where you don´t need to make gates to score but get additional points if you do so.

Proswooper, would you like to ban all unavaiable wings but allow any kind of modification you can do yourself (or have done by a rigger)? How about this "lineattachmentpoints sewed into the canopy thing"? I did this myself, is that still fine with you or unfair? I think it´s fun and part of the game to hone your canopy as much as you can. So from what point on would you be talking about an unavaiable wing? Different profil? Or already if it comes to a different line trim?

The "airtec-opinion" is that the neptune readings are of no use. The viso readings are good enough for them to be taken serious, but only if the device is mounted either on your back (for example behind your container) or at the very front of your upper leg. Wristmounted etc. will result in too high readings cause any move will change the airflow/pressure and result in too fast topspeedreadings...

While the majority of my landings is in between the high eighties and low nineties (between 88 and 91, with the excepting of one 95) I now experienced a 101mph while experimentating with higher initiation altitudes. Airfield elevation was 2300ft MSL. I´m already in contact with airtec about this landing/speed due to the fact it was more than the activation speed of my speedcypres (that scared me). At the moment they are saying it´s close but still save cause the device takes airfield elevation into account. I´ll let you know if new/additional information comes in.

As I know... but that was not the question, question was: Would the 96 at 2.4 or the 90 at 2.56 go further? I don´t use my rears for accurcy as well...

Picture has been taken by team "MUDFLY" from Portugal during the SpanishOpen... Add some more!

Distance!

Does anyone know what (velocity)wingloadings have been flown by the top competitors at the Mile-Hi Cup 2007? (or any other competition with worldclass pilots this season) I´d like to get an impression about the "very latest in optimum wingloading" (on velos)... What do you think performs better (in the hands of a worldclass pilot), a (velo) 96 loaded at 2.4 or a (velo) 90 loaded at 2.56?

New highscore: 95mph

91 mph

I do left hand in all conditions. My idea behind that is that - as long as you don´t have "unlimited" training possibilities (>1000jumps/year) - you´ll be more consistent if you´r doing the same type of turn every time and just move your initiation point. Of course I agree that it´s way easier (in crosswind situations) to fly your set-up against the wind but it can be done downwind and is not as difficult as it might seem...

Dear NewClearSports, is where any way I can get a private message to you? Please let me know, thanks, take care and all the best, Morris

Why not? What slider did you use?

I can highly recommend the Springo Canopies from Parachute de France for wingsuitjumps. Then the canopy hit the market it came in the beginning with a slider that caused too hard openings for many customers on regular skydives. For that reason the manufacturer switched to a larger slider very soon. A Springo with the old, smaller slider is fantastic - opens almost like a BlackJack :-)

And to bring it to an end (I promise) - here we got about 140m = almost ~ 470ft... (To the experts: No, we´re not at Mile-Hi-Elevation, field elavation is - as far as I know - about 2000ft MSL...)

The perfect pond two days before the competition, almost ready to go...

Hi Rob, I just wanted to make sure that readers don´t get a wrong impression about how much an "outrageous distance" really is... CU soon, Moritz

...and the "outrageous 280+ ft distance" would have been just a touchdown in the penaltyzones of the accuracy course... (maybe it´s been a mistake in calculating meters into feet? the "easy way" is: meters x 3 plus! 10% not minus 10%, for example 120m x 3 = 360 + 10% (=+36) = 396ft, not 360 - 36 = 324ft... could this have caused the mistake?)

Dear Rob McVey, thanks a lot for your very nice article about the SpanishOpen of CanopyPiloting at Skydive Lillo!! I just found two very little things in it I´d like to correct. "Wutzi Wagner lost his second place positioning by missing a gate in accuracy...". The names are mixed up, it was not him but Rodrigo Ferreira of Portugal. Before that miss Rodrigo was jumping very very strong, especially in CarvingSpeed (he won the Silver in Speed). Wutzi (Wuzi?) Wagner also had excellent runs, especially in Accuracy (he won the Gold in Accuracy). The overall medals you´r naming are of course correct! The distances you´r naming are about 100ft too short. Have a look at the attached picture of a landing in a distance round just before the 120m (~400ft) mark (visible in the background). Results say that the longest runs have been about 15% further than the one in the picture... (Picture has been taken by Team "MUDFLY" of Portugal.) Once again: Thanks a lot for the nice article!!! Morris

Here come some more... (taken by Daniel Ramsbott)

Don´t know if this can be/makes sense or if I´m right at all but I got the impression that my openings are more consitant on heading.