pilot-one

I'm not sure what's going on with Mel. I've used him in the past and I've never had a problem. In fact he was quick to get stuff turned around and out the door. Whatever is going on isn't too responsible and reflects poorly on Icarus. Although they've disassociated themselves from him some people still don't have the word. It's really too bad because of the Icarus supported rigging lofts (para concepts) he was willing to tweak and adjust and modify whereas Para Concepts will only do it "by the book" so to speak. To Mel: I can't imagine you Mel somewhere in your field of work outside of rigging where you don't have access to your email or this forum. You came back last time after a long hiatus and said this would never happen again. "The logistics were worked out" or so you said. Come on man....we supported you for a long time please step up to the plate and at least return the equipment to these people so they can move on.

Just shut up and jump

Hello?? what I said was "if your body position isn't perfect it will slam the shit out of you" The reason I said that is because that's the way it is. I had 2 Stiletto 190's and they both did the same thing. I agree that if your body position is perfect then it doesn't open too bad. However if you think a Stiletto 190 opens soft then you've never jumped a Pilot. The key here to my experience is this is a 190 square foot canopy. Not a 170 or 150. It is probable that the 190 is completely different.

When canopies are new, it's much easier to enforce jump numbers. There used to be a jump number for Velos, too. However, as they start to become sold as used canopies, it's impossible for manufactures to enforce jump number requirements. Ummmmm....Duhhh? I'm talking about a demo from the manufacturer.

Listen to me. I've jumped the Stiletto 190. It really is a nasty canopy. If you're not in the perfect body position it will slam the shit out of you and then go into a spinning line twist. Drop the Stiletto idea..Trust me. Personally if I were you I would give the Pilot a try. It opens much nicer than the Sabre 2 and is much more fun to fly. It probably doesn't have the swoop that a Sabre 2 has but for me that doesn't matter.

That's because there are a bunch of instruments to look at. I'm a pilot too. I used to fly the 727-200. Ever see all the crap in one of those? Lots of the instruments that displayed numbers were decimal dials. Kind of like the odometer in your car. Could you imagine your Nav/Com without a digital display? Most glass panels do show a scale type display but almost every one of them is supplemented with a digital display just above or off to the side. That's what I prefer to look at . What it comes down to is what one prefers. I'll take a digital altimeter hands down.

I prefer the Pilot by far over the Sabre 2. I jump the Pilot 168 right now. The Pilot opens softer, opens on heading more often, opens without endcell closure and is quite a bit more fun to fly. The only other canopy I would buy would be another Pilot. In fact I did. I have 2. 1 for each rig.

It was 500 jumps. If you want to demo one these days they call your dropzone to find out if you can handle it. They really don't enforce any jump number in particular.

This is VERY subjective. I personally can read the digital much easier. Try a Neptune. I can't read the VISO either. The display is much smaller on the VISO and the Neptune has much better contrast.

I used one right off AFF. If you can't jump without an altimeter (if it quits) then you've got something else to worry about. I've never had a problem with my Neptune. If that's what you like and you've got a license to jump or permission from your instructors then go for it. That's what I did.

What a stupid remark.

According to PD they are exactly the same.

I would like to invest in your multi-million dollar venture.

Liquid Sky is awesome. He understands what it takes to build a good jumpsuit. Ouragon does too but Julio is spot on with customer service and delivery times. He had mine out within 10 days.

You have to pay more for personal attention? Hmmmm..Maybe I missed something. How can that be expained?

Jump more often. The more you jump, the more relaxed you'll be. There's a lot to be said for this thought. When I've not jumped for a couple of weeks or so it takes at least a few jumps to get comfortable with jumping into freefall. If I'm doing 15 or so jumps every weekend and a few here and there during the week it seems like I don't get out of the groove so to speak. I still always have some fear to overcome on each and every jump it's just easier when I'm jumping more often.

One way to conquer fear is to fake it. If you pretend you are not scared by acting cool and like you are not scared that is how you will feel. Something I learned from Brian Germain. You may want to check out his book: www.transcendingfear.com

If your jump numbers are correct and you intend to jump at a 1.8 wing loading expect some serious negative feedback on this forum. Personally I think with regards to the equipment there would be no problem. They're are a lot of people that load the Sabre 2 even more than that. More importantly I think a 135 is much too small for your experience. Please reconsider. You are getting into a different arena by downsizing to a 135 and smaller canopy.

I don't get why the tandems are not long gone before anyone else gets out. The tandems should have their own jump run at about 10000. And then the rest of us ride in comfort to real exit altitude. At least that's the way it is where I jump

Usually my average is about 157 with the people I jump with. 47 seconds from exit to deployment. Of course I'm a freeflyer.

All theory and formulas put aside and considering most of us in this discussion actually do what we're talking about I propose this challenge: On your next jump leave your slider up and your chest strap tight and then report back on the performance of your canopy ride in general. My guess is won't like it.

I'm not referring to making the canopy wider. That is physically impossible. What needs to be wider are the anchor points of the suspension lines. There is no way the angle of dihedral won't change if you move the 3 rings apart from each other. By doing this you are effectively lengthening the suspension lines by removing or reducing the angle created by the restriction of the slider or chest strap. The further out the line is attached to the canopy the more the effect is. Further more this makes a more direct link to your leg strap. The point where you are really connect to your canopy. This in turn makes harness turns much more effective. All I have to say is "try it" and you will see.

Ummm. A good laugh? How so?

Huh? This makes no sense whatsoever. It has nothing to do with the aerodynamics of the pilot. We're talking about the wing here. What loosening the chest strap and dropping the slider does is take the anhedral out of the wing to make the wing more efficient. A vinyl suit would make a difference under canopy probably but in a completely different arena. This is really very simple to understand and anybody who thinks it doesn't make a difference in any size canopy has never tried it. I took a Sabre 2 230 out for a test jump the other day and test the "placebo effect" or the "emperor' s new clothing" concepts. Even on this size canopy the differece is very noticable. In fact it turns a very boring canopy into something that is reasonably fun. Very wrong. Loosening the chest strap is key to flattening the wing by separating the anchor points of the suspension lines. The wider the better. I'll agree that the RDS removes the drag from the equation but a regular slider colapsed and stowed produces very little drag compared to the benefits of loosening the strap. Actually both would be best. Maybe that's why a lot swoopers use an RDS and open their chest straps. Hmmmm. After further thought on this thread I think we are talking about two different things. What I think billvon is looking at is improving the aerodynamic drag factor to increase speed, glide, etc. Whereas I am looking at the handling characteristics of the canopy to improve turns (toggle, harness and riser), flare, glide angle, etc.

I am replying to my own post to apologize for the grammatical mess.