hookit

Cool....thank you both for the info!

I read an excellent article online on canopy skills (by John LeBlanc I believe) a while back with a section on high performance landings. I believe it was "The Canopy Pilot's Handbook" and I may still have it on my home pc. If I can find it I'll see if I can post it. As I remember he recommended you first get a feel for using your risers to control the canopy while still high above the ground. NEVER let go of the toggles in order to manipulate the risers. You should keep the toggles in your hands at all times such that you can release the risers and flare immediately using the toggles if necessary. Assuming you're very competent and consistent with landing the canopy normally try pulling down on both front risers gently and evenly on final approach. You should release the risers well before it's time to flare the first few tries. You should never ride the risers so long that you have to stab the toggles immediately after releasing the risers in order to flare before encountering the ground. Also you want to let off the risers gently. It should be a smooth and fluid effort of easing off the front risers and then easing down on the toggles. You'll get a feel for the timing involved here but be careful. By pulling down on the front risers you'll increase your airspeed and the ground will start coming at you faster than you're used to. I know it sounds simple enough but I personally know at least one person who's ridden the front risers all the way to the ground. As a wise person once said: You can't flare with your front risers. That should certainly get you started on the path to Swoopville. It is a long, gradual learning process. Enjoy! Also make it a habit to watch other canopy pilot's approaches and set ups. Ask those whom you see doing well under canopy for advice. Then double check their advice with another. As Jim Slaton said: "Take advice, choose wisely who you listen to..." Be an avid student and never stop learning! Long Safe Swoops, Trey

Finally, I have a video camera! I'll officially be a freeflyer now! I've had a Haf-Rak and d-box sitting in my closet for months waiting for a camera! Now all I need to do is mount the d-box and work on fitting the helmet to my head a bit. And, of course, get a wide-angle lens and CamEye etc... Any pointers on mounting the bonehead D-box to the haf-rak (side-mount) would be appreciated. Also, I notice that the helmet doesn't fit very snug against my forehead (otherwise the fit's great) so I'd like to try and increase the padding in the front of the helmet to snug it up a bit. Has anyone out there had this problem with a Bone-Head and, if so, were you able to correct it easily? One of the camera flyers at Spaceland flies a Haf-Rak with a PC-9 so I'll probably see if he can give me a hand mounting the d-box. I just thought I'd check here for feedback first. Thanks, Trey Next up: still camera

Hey there, Dave! I just saw your signature and I must say that seeing the word bounce associated with success in a skydiving forum makes me awfully uncomfortable! Blues, Trey

I jump a J1 which has the same size main tray as the J2 (up to 150 sq. ft. according to Javelin). I would say it would be possible (but not easy) to pack a Sabre 170 in it. I originally had a Stiletto 150 that fit snugly in the container. If you get the J2 with a Sabre 170 I would say to be prepared for difficulty getting the canopy in the bag (especially if the canopy is new). Plus the container will likely take some 'coaxing' to close. I pack for myself and I don't think I'd be willing to go to the extra hassle EVERY time I pack. I would recommend you go with the J3. Packing will be much easier while you have the 170 and you will have no problem downsizing to a 150 and probably even a 135 main in that container. I currently have an FX 104 in my J1. I had to shorten the closing loop significantly and the rig looks a bit top-heavy with a 143 reserve (and cypress) but there's adequate tension on the main-pin. Good Luck, Trey

305 jumps in 2001....think I'll go for > 500 in 2002!

Cool! Thanks!

Okay...I know this is off-topic but how do you automatically quote a message to which you're replying as Spectrejumper and Skymedic did earlier in this thread? I tried checking under Control Panel and didn't see it there. I also read the FAQ's and searched previous threads and wasn't able to turn it up! Thanks!

Spectrejumper wrote: I've never bought into the whole 'ask someone else what canopy you can handle' theory of canopy buying. None of those people are going to be under that canopy looking at the ground coming up much faster than you've ever seen before. If you're looking to downsize, I'd recommend you borrow/rent a canopy one size smaller than what you're currently jumping and put some jumps on it. If you can consistantly land safely and want more speed, go down to the next size. The reason I feel it's a good idea for a low time jumper to ask a more experienced jumper to watch their landings and let them know if they feel the low timer is ready to downsize is because the experienced jumper can offer an objective opinion. They will be able to see if you're not finishing your flare completely or if you're pumping the toggles or perhaps waiting too late to begin the flare and then stabbing it out (all fairly common problems for low time jumpers). There are any number of things that a jumper could consistently get away with on a large canopy but then get hurt using the same technique on a smaller and faster canopy once they've downsized. Also a person who's been in the sport for at least a few years will have seen plenty of people biff in and will advise a conservative plan for downsizing. On a side note, another good idea IMO is to get someone to video your landings. You'll notice details of your form and technique that you wouldn't have without the video. Plus there's the digme factor!! I whole-heartedly agree that someone should downsize only one canopy size at a time and get used the the increased speed and sink of the smaller canopy before downsizing again. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. Blues, Trey

Icarus canopies also offers an overview of canopy performance characteristics at various wing loadings: http://www.icaruscanopies.com/choosing.htm It's interesting reading but the best thing to remember is that as performance increases the safety margin decreases. As a new jumper you will definitely notice a difference between the 170 and 190 at the wing-loadings you're mentioning. Buying a first canopy is a hard decision because you're torn between not wanting to hurt yourself and not wanting to be bored under the canopy a month after you purchase it. The best advice I can give you is to ask a local jumpmaster (or other qualified jumper) who has seen you fly and land a canopy what they feel you're ready for. The biggest indication of what size canopy you can safely fly is going to be an honest assessment of how you're flying and landing the canopy you're currently under (even if it's a rental). Also be aware that canopy manufacturers offer demos. You could call PD up and ask to demo a sabre2 190 (I believe the hornet is a sabre knockoff). They'll more than likely let you have it for two weeks for only the cost of shipping. (I believe Kolla is the person in charge of demo's for PD and she's extremely pleasant to deal with.) In two weeks (with good weather) you should be able to knock out at least 5 to 10 jumps on the canopy. This would greatly improve your experience level as well as give you a better feel for whether or not you're ready for a 170. You didn't indicate how many jumps you have in your original post but I'm guessing you have somewhere between 10 and 30 jumps? At that experience level I personally feel a wing loading of 1.36 would be overly aggressive. Blue Skies and Soft Landings, Trey

Hmmm, let's slow down a little more. We'll pull back the throttle a bit more and then (this is something most students don't understand) we'll have to add power to go even slower -while we maintain altitude-. Again, we'll maintain altitude by changing the angle of attack of the wing. We're NOW going about 42 knots. We're still maintaining altitude and we're still in complete control of the aircraft. It just happens to be set up the same way it would be if we were flairing out for a landing. Quick -- about how much lift is being created by the wing? Wow. Thanks for the the visual. It's a great description/explanation of why the saying 'airspeed equals lift' is not strictly true for aircraft. In the last part of the example however, where you're having to add power to maintain altitude at the slower airspeed you're offsetting some of the plane's weight with the thrust of the prop therefore the wings are no longer generating lift equal to the force of weight (or gravity...whatever). Let's carry that a bit further. What if I'm in an F15 and I go vertical? The wings are now generating 0 lift (if lift is defined as opposing weight) but I'm still flying. Anyway, I guess my main point is that the analogy doesn't carry over too well from aircraft to canopies in that we don't have horizontal stabilizers or elevators on canopies therefore we don't have the same control over our angle of attack as an aircraft. We also don't have engines...(yet!). Perhaps a better demonstration of why airspeed doesn't always equal lift on a canopy would be when a canopy pilot is in a hard dive following a front riser turn and is now hanging on double fronts and accelerating rapidly toward the ground. While airspeed is increasing dramatically, lift is not. Perhaps 'Airspeed equals Lift' should be modified to say 'Airspeed equals Lift Available'. By increasing airspeed in the dive I now have at my disposal tons more lift which will eventually (hopefully!) get used when I flatten out and get a beautifully long, smooth swoop! Thanks for the input. It's been very thought-provoking and educational! -Trey

---Wing loading and drag go hand in hand eh!--- If you're referring to a single jumper under different canopies then certainly there will be an inversely proportional relationship between wing loading and drag. However, if you compare two different jumpers of greatly varied weights it could easily be the case that the lighter jumper could be at a lesser wing loading AND still have less drag because they're on a smaller canopy than the heavier jumper. Example: I load my Vengeance 120 at just over 1.5 while, as Kris pointed out, Brit was loading her 109 at just over 1.1. I'm at a higher wing loading but Brit has less drag due to the smaller size of the canopy. However, if we hadn't had low clouds and rain here in Houston all last weekend I would have been flying a Samurai 105 (insert very large smile here!!!) on which I would have had less drag than Brit did on her 109. But no, we couldn't have nice weather for a weekend now, could we? Apparently nice weather is reserved for Mondays and Tuesdays in Houston. Okay, sorry. I'll stop whining....for now. -Trey

>One, canopies inflate (or reinflate) more quickly and reliablu in brakes - that's one reason brakes are stowed for openings. Why would a canopy inflate more quickly in brakes? It seems the only thing that's going to inflate a canopy is air flowing into the cells. If a canopy is at full flight it should have more air flowing into the cells than it would if it were in partial brakes and therefore I would think it should inflate more quickly. I can certainly see how a canopy would inflate 'more reliably' in brakes. I believe the main reason the brakes are stowed when packing is to help with keeping the canopy on heading during the opening. As one side inflates more quickly than the other it won't be at full flight and therefore won't spin up or turn off course as quickly. I'm having a really hard time seeing how flying in partial brakes could help prevent a canopy from collapsing in turbulence. As you slow your forward flight you also decrease the pressure in the cells and, I would think, make the canopy MORE susceptible to collapse because it would then take a lesser degree of sudden wind change (turbulence) to deflate the canopy. Isn't the primary reason that a canopy flown at a high wingloading is less susceptible to turbulence due to the fact that the more highly loaded canopy flies with more forward wind speed and therefore maintains a higher degree of pressurization in the cells? What am I missing? Blues, Trey

Hey, guys, I need contact info for Jason who jumps at Skydive Houston. Unfortunately I don't even know his last name. He's a freeflyer who did his student jumps at Spaceland this past spring but now jumps at Waller. He's a network engineer and said Saturday evening that he'd help me with something internet-related. I was going to get his number or email on Sunday but, unfortunately, it rained all day Sunday and I never made it out to the dz. If anyone out there knows how to contact him or can get me in touch with him please let me know! Thanks! -Trey

There are three main deployment methods currently being used that I'm aware of. Rip-cord, throw-out and pull-out. RC and throw-out have already been discussed in this thread so I'll limit my post to a description of a pull-out system. Pull-out consists of a pud (a kind of little handle) located on the bottom of the container which is attached to a bridle that runs to the pin. The bridle continues on past the pin to the pilot chute which is stored INSIDE the container (like rc). This means when you pull the pud you are directly pulling the pin and opening the container. You then continue to pull a little further to extract the pilot chute from the container and introduce it to the wind. The main advantage of a pull-out is that it's impossible to have a horse-shoe mal because, if the container opens prematurely, the pilot chute is exposed to the wind and will extract the canopy. Technically speaking (judging from some earlier posts in this thread I believe there may be some confusion on this issue) a horseshoe mal is only possible on a throw out system. It occurs when the container opens prematurely but the pilot chute remains in the pouch. This leads to a 'horseshoe' consisting of the lines running up from the container to the bag and the bridle running down from the bag to the pilot chute. There's a pic of a pull-out pud on a Voodoo container here: http://www.rigginginnovations.com/voodoo/main.htm I believe they show the system with the pud becuase the container looks cleaner without the bulge of a pilot chute in a pouch under the container. The main disadvantage I'm aware of with a pull-out system is that it's possible for the pud to get dislodged either in freefall or on the plane ride. Then you're looking at a reserve ride. However, from what I've seen, the systems have improved such that this is pretty rare. Plus you should always be checking those handles before leaving the plane regardless of what deployment system you're on! You can request a pull-out deployment system on pretty much any rig you order nowadays. I know for sure that Javelin offers a pull-out option and I intend to go to a pull-out on my next rig. Corrections and feedback are welcome! Blue Skies and Long Safe Swoops, Trey

I used to live in Colorado Springs and did my AFF progression at Skydive the Rockies. It was a fun little dz flying a Cessna 206. The people there were great and the scenery was amazing! It's right by the Royal Gorge bridge and we flew directly over the bridge on each climb to altitude. They definitely cater to students and tandems but it's still a fun dz for an experienced jumper especially if you're looking for a mellow day with great scenery and relaxed jumps. Plus, if Skip is still there then there will always be beer afterwards! Once I got my A license I started jumping at Front Range Skydivers mainly because they had a Caravan and turned way more loads. Plus, since I lived on the east side of Colorado Springs, they were much closer. Unfortunately I never really got to know too many of the folks there...I was just off student status and usually jumped with one or two other newbies. I definitely don't remember it as being a party dz. It's east of Colorado Springs (away from the mountains) so the scenery isn't nearly as pretty as Skydive the Rockies. If you're an experienced jumper moving to Colorado Springs I would recommend checking out both dz's. Also there are several dz's in the Denver area as I recall but I never managed to get up there to jump them. Now I live in Houston and jump at Skydive Spaceland! All I can say is I love our Super Otter and landing at sea level. I also love our swoop ditch but that's a whole different story! Blue Skies and Safe Swoops! -Trey