Canuck

Hey Deuce, controlled and stood up are not synonymous. Butt slides can be very controlled, as can a PLF. I would say that classic accuracy landings are very controlled, but almost never stood up. As to injuries and what degree of injury is acceptable before a score should no longer count, how should it be different than any other sport where injury is a possibility? Should a boxer not be able to win a match if he is bleeding by the end of it? Should a marathon runner not get a final time if he collapses after crossing the finishing line from complete over exertion? Just food for thought... Canuck

You mean the video that shows him setting a BAD EXAMPLE by not flying a standard landing pattern, and by flying extremely close to several dangerous obstacles (hangar, cars, tarmack)? Yeah, I think that video is cool as shit. Very impressive. Not quite as impressive as a 678 ft. swoop - but very impressive. Canuck

Derek, swooping sets a bad example. Busting out a 540 sets a bad example. Flaring with rear risers sets a bad example. Landing close to obstacles (bodies of water, wind blades, crowds) sets a bad example. Jumping tiny shit sets a bad example. We would highly discourage any new jumper from doing any of these things. Jumping out of airplanes sets a bad example, so what the fuck is the big deal? We live in a do as I say not as I do world. Several posts up someone asked you why we don't make classic accuracy competitors stand up their landings. You never came up with a good reason. Got one yet? On the other hand, you have been given good reaons for why swoopers sometimes don't stand their landings up - to go further and to land safer. Both are irrefutable. Damn dude - your posts are so green it's almost like your shooting for a moderator spot again. Canuck

You got it. Canuck

They load their Tri 135s in the 1.4 to 1.5 range, and I have the Stiletto loaded in the 1.8 to 1.9 range. Even at that though the Stiletto still wants to out glide them and I sometimes have to sashay a little. Canuck

I've just been using my Stiletto 107. It's by no means ideal, but I make it work. I generally find if they're doing 4 way sequential, I'm on them about the same time the 3rd is in. 2-way is trickier, I usually find myself a little low on opening (no suprise considering I'm jumping a bagged Stiletto with a regular slider on it), but usually I'm in a good spot by the time the clock starts ticking. I definately have some nice footage of the bottom skin of my canopy though... Once I'm in place it's cake. 2-way moves around a bunch, but I find it's pretty easy to follow, especially if you know what the dive looks like (and if you don't, you're not doing a very good job). If I go to Russia with the team next year for the 2-way event, I will deffinately be jumping a competition Tri, either the same size as they do (135) or preferably a 120 to give me the slight range advantage. Canuck

They do both. PD has a competition lineset not available to the public. Packing beside Jay, his lines are noticably longer than are mine (granted he was jumping a 103 compared to my 96). Lengthening the risers in addition to increasing the recovery arc also gives you more control range that simply adding line length does not. Canuck

While I agree that the differences produced by an HMA lineset, folding over risers, or stitching back the quarter inch of webbing on attachment points is only going to be noticed by those at the very top of their game, adding 4+ inches of length to the risers I believe will produce quite a noticable difference. In a different thread, several people commented, including Chuck, that longer risers made their canopies fly "completely differently." Canuck

Nope - in Spain they were on Triathalons. They just much prefer the openings and landings over the Lightnings. The team took a short break after Gavin passed away (non-skydiving) but are now back at it. Lyal and Aidan are both still on it, and a couple new guys that are coming along nicely. They will be at the WC in AZ this October and the World Games next year in Russia. I've been doing video for them when they train, but John Smith is still their official camera man. Canuck

Good post. Your observation of the difference in flight characteristics between the Velo and VX is the same one that I've made. What seems to be going the distance now is some combination of higher loadings, multi-rotational turns, steeper approaches, and an assisted recovery. In the right hands, the Velocity seems very well suited to that style. A couple of my fellow Canuckleheads that both did very well at last years WC (Johnny Z, and Pauly) both jump VXs and have both expressed their opinions that they think the Velo is a much easier canopy to keep pointed at the ground. At least one of them, I beleive, is making the switch. Canuck

Sorry Chuck, I had specifically requested that we not dick wagg and tried to keep the discussion productive. I know the topic has been beat around lots before, but I think it's still a valid one. Others' opinions? Canuck

You crack me up. I said straight out in my last post that I have not personally fully developed the technique which best suits the Velo flight characteristics, yet you want to bet me a jump ticket that I haven't based on my on-line profile. Not that it really matters, but I haven't exactly done 170 jumps a year over the last 10 years. Ah forget it... Yeah, Tagle was jumping a VX. Does that strengthen your argument? He got a Velo and started kicking ass. I see you jump a VX 111. Was that the one JC had before he also made the switch? Since you never answered the question from my previous hypothetical question - allow me to do it for you: It is the pilot not the canopy until you get to a certain level of proficiency, and then it becomes the canopy completely. Otherwise it becomes a completely plausible argument that whichever one, Tagle or Moledski, we had put under the Stiletto might have actually beat the other under his Velo. If you want your jump ticket, you're gonna have to come up here to claim it. It's a long haul for a jump out of a 206 from 11,000. Canuck

Didn't know we were talking about "our" level. Since neither one of us has any idea about the others skill, I have no idea what "our" level is. I pose one final question then. Lets take Mr. Moledski and Mr. Tagle, arguably the top 2 canopy pilots on the planet today. Under their Velos they post very similar number to one and other in most competitions. Now take either one of them and put them up against the other under a Stiletto. From the expected results, can you really still claim that it's not the canopy it's the pilot? Canuck

Settle dude - don't let your Velo envy make you a hater. And lets not get into an online dick wagging contest about who would beat me under whatever type of canopy. I should certainly hope that anybody on PDs team could out swoop me under a Katana - otherwise it's time to move the fuck over. I agreed with you that skill/technique is of the utmost importance, but this continual claim that "it's not the canopy, it's the pilot" lacks reason and logic. Just as in any sport, the top performers are using the top equipment. It is my belief that the techniques currently being used to post such outstanding recent results are best complemented by the flight characteristics of the Velo. That simple. No where in there is a claim that I personally have fully developed that technique. Canuck

BS bro. It's all about the technique. and you know it. Then why is nobody on the PD team jumping and winning under a Katana or Stiletto? Technique is for sure important, but there is no question that wing design also plays a big part, and with Velocities topping the podium at pretty much every meet in the last few years, it's getting harder and harder not to admit that it just might be the best HP canopy on the market right now. Canuck

I realize I could contact each harness/container manufacturer, but this will be easier. For those of you who have bought after-market risers in the 26 inch variety, where did you get them and how much did they cost? I know I can get them from Sunpath, but with stainless I think they will be pushing a couple hundred bucks, which seems pretty steep. Canuck

They still show the 99 as being available on their website, which I believe is fairly up do date... Canuck

The Canadian national team uses competition Triathalon 135s loaded in the 1.5:1 range for both 2-way and 4-way sequential. I gather that if they were going to have canopies specific for the 2-way event they would be smaller - maybe even the Tri 99s. Canuck

About the same time Steve Curtis joined it. I suspect that TJ now being on a team with Fruitcake (who has been sponsored by Icarus for years) has a lot to do with it. Also, now that Team Extreme is done, Icarus might have a few more bucks to throw around... Canuck

But we're not talking about fans, we're talking about competitors. There are really no fans in skydiving period (although I think canopy piloting has the ability to change that) so I don't think it's relevant to the discussion. As to the judges not being freefliers, I don't beleive one needs to have participated in any sport to be able to coach or officiate it well - lots of examples come to mind from pretty much any major league sport. The artistic events aren't going away. In fact, in canopy piloting it's just getting warmed up! Canuck

I disagree totally. Usually the prettier it is, the more technically challenging it is. Take a look at how many Olympic sports have subjective scoring (figure skating, gymnastics, freestyle skiing/snowboarding, diving, synchro swimming, etc.). It would be a difficult argument to make that any of these sports are fading away or that they are just about being pretty. I don't think it's the subjectivity that's the issue. It's the consistency in the subjectivity that's the issue. Canuck

Not a chance - hell, you can probably find almost 10 Airspeed members past and present that have 15000 jumps. Still, an awesome accomplishment! Canuck

Indeed, swooping is why I jump. Unfortunately, I've picked up some bad habits along the way that necessitate going higher than 4000 feet, like doing AFF, tandem video, flying camera for my freefly team, etc. But be damn sure, I am going to swoop at the end of every skydive I make, unless by doing so I am going to put the safety of myself or anybody else in jeopardy. I fly predictably, even for those who have never seen me land before. Anybody above me under canopy would think I was setting up for the traditional down-wind, base, final approach, and if they blinked right as I threw my 270, they probably wouldn't even notice that I hadn't just done a 90 on to final. Fly predictable, fly safe, fly heads up - everyone, not just the swoopers. That's the key to everyone getting to the ground safely. Sashaying through the pattern gets in the way of way more people than diving into it. Oh yeah, and don't get out of the plane if you're going to open down-wind of the landing area - that makes it real hard to get into the pattern in the first place. I've seen shitty spotting cause WAY more traffic issues than swooping. Canuck

Yeah...what Ian said... And for the record, I'm pretty sure that Mr. Moledski, current world champion canopy pilot, had he really wanted to could have stood that landing up. Canuck

As it does for swoopers. Same concept - the longer we can go without making contact with the ground, the further we will go across the ground. By sticking our legs out in front of us we get the benefit of the extra horizontal distance gained from the additional vertical drop. Canuck