polarbear

I actually read a fatality report (in a foreign country) about two guys who were doing a CRW downplane. The plan was to carry the downplane to within a few hundred feet of the ground, separate, and land with the speed of the down plane. They formed the downplane successfully. Aparently, each person had his feet in the armpits of the other person. Upon separation at a few hundred feet, one guy's foot snagged the other guy's cutaway handle and released his main...he had no time for a reserve. Obviously, that is an extreme case.

I usually jump at a small cessna DZ, so I don't have too many people to worry about. But, when I turn and track, I put my head on my chest to look behind me to see where other people are going. Doing a barrell roll while tracking to check overhead airspace seems like a good idea, but I think the primary responsibility is to check the airspace underneath you. Why? Because it is the unspoken standard...it is easier to see below than over, so if everyone checks below, there shouldn't be problems. If you flip on your back for too long of a time, you are canceling the ability to check beneath you and thus breaking the chain. Maybe this is something every DZ should standardize, sort of like a left or right hand landing pattern.

Well said. Courtrooms are hazardous places.

I think my question was worthwhile...groundzero addressed it but I would like to hear cobaltdan's answer... Why is one continuous seam better than overstitching? That isn't supposed to sound flip...I just don't understand why one is significantly better than the other.

I found a question on the FAA written exam that clearly indicates any appropriately rated rigger (back, seat, chest, lap) can assemble canopies...Senior or Master doesn't matter. That makes sense. Looks like this was a case of a misinformed FAA inspector.

There are several factors that contribute to the front riser pressure. Just being elliptical doesn't decide the pressure...it has to do (I think) with where the weight is suspended, and where the lift is created on the airfoil. A center of lift forward on the airfoil will contribute to higher riser pressure; moving the center of lift back will help lower it. I know for a fact that some very highly shaped canopies have low riser pressure (ex. vengeance). One technique to get around high riser pressure is to use an "over the hill" method. This means fly in some brakes (1/2-1/4) prior to initiating the riser maneuver. Then, smoothly let up the brakes and initiate the front riser maneuver. You should INITIALY have lower riser pressure, which will help you initiate the maneuver. As the speed builds up, your riser pressure will also build. That's where the pull-ups help. As always, try it up high first. Your rate of turn/dive can change when you do this, so learn it before trying to land with it.

Good luck, SkymonkeyOne

I think that sounds like a good idea. Personally, I don't think Dan was bashing, just selling. Nothing wrong with that. What I am interested in knowing is OK, you (Dan) say you make your seams a certain way, why is that way better enough that I should buy it? I have owned three canopies, none of them Atair (though the Cobalt has caught my attention), and have never experienced a failed seam. In addition, I have only ever seen one canopy (out of probably hundreds, maybe thousands) that had a failed seam, and in this case the seam was actually intact (the fabric ripped alongside the seam). If you (Dan) simply meant to say that the quality of Atair canopies is at least equal to other manufacturers, so quality worries aren't a good reason to not buy Atair, that sounds pretty reasonable. I hadn't been worried about the quality, but maybe other people are.

Hmmm...I'm not sure that pumping brakes increases cell pressure. Slower flight=lower stagnation pressure=lower cell pressure. I suppose this would be true in steady state. If you had a highly pressurized canopy, and then pulled the brakes down, it would sort of be like squeazing the air out of the canopy during packing...at first it ballons up in high pressure, but eventually the pressure subsides. On most canopies, the end cells actually have a lower angle of attack then the center cells because of the anhedral angle. This means the stagnation point is closer to the top surface. I had been thinking that end cell closure resulted from the mouth of the end cell getting pinned down by the stagnation point. Pulling the toggles (or rear risers) increases the angle of attack, helping to move the stagnation point off of the pinned-down cell mouth. In addition, the pressure is momentarily increased in a transient, as described above. Together, these cause the end cell to inflate. In steady state, I don't see how flying in brakes creates higher cell pressurization I suppose that's all pretty academic. In the end I guess it depends on the canopy.

Your right; I didn't see that flap open.

Everyone else has given some good advice. I only wanted to add somthing about sizing the container. Rather than using the PIA chart values, I suggest you talk directly to Sunrise Rigging (Wings manufacturer) and get their opinions on what canopies fit in what size container. My experience is that the container manufacturer usually has a good idea of what container to use for certain canopies. As for the reserve, both reserves have good records. Consider the maximum allowed weights. A Super Raven I allows only 185 lbs. maximum; a Raven Dash-M I allows 222 pounds. If you buy a used Dash-M, pay attention to whether or not it was subject to the recent service bulletian and if so, if it has been "fixed". My guess is if you buy a container that fits a ZP 170, you should be able to pack a Triathlon 190 into it. It might be tight, though. Talk to the manufacturer and get their opinion.

I don't think it's really about weight saving...hell, you save less than a pound; not much to get worried over. I just bought a new PD reserve and it came with (reserve) slinks...I asked about it and was told that Slinks are stronger than standard links, so I used 'em. The (reserve) slinks are TSO'd; there shouldn't be a problem. I have personally seen hundreds of jumps on main slinks without incident. Obviously, use what you are comfortable with...rapide links can definitely be considered "tried and true".

Congratulations, Chuck, I've heard the AFF is a challenging rating to get.

That seems a little counter-intuitive to me. The faster the canopy flies, the higher the pressure in the cells and thus the more stable. I had operated under the belief that flying in brakes will help the canopy reinflate more quickly in the event of a collapse, but flying in full flight results in higher cell pressure and reduces the likelihood of the collapse. Any thoughts? I suppose that it has some to do with where the stagnation point is on the cell mouth...if pulling the brakes in a little moves the stagnation point closer to the center of the cell mouth, I suppose that might make it less susceptible to turbulence. I fly in full flight and make smooth, light control inputs.

No, I think he (the student) has it. Otherwise, where did the bend in the ripcord come from? It looks like the student was late for the pull...this picture must have been taken at the perfect momment in order to not see the pilot chute. It doesn't look to me that the container is open yet.

I've had bad experiences with two major manufacturers. In the first case, I called the company, arranged for the demo, it never showed. I called them back, they said they lost my request, I made it again, arrangements were made, the canopy never showed. I gave up and bought something else. In the second case, I arranged ahead of time for the demo to ensure I could get it when I wanted. I was told "no problem, that demo isn't busy right now". Time came for me to demo it, it had been shipped to someone else and they had not shipped it back yet. I was told "we'll let you know when it comes in". I waited a couple of weeks, didn't here from them, emailed, and was told it had been shipped to someone else again. I gave up and bought something else. I realize that setting up a demo program and keeping everyone happy isn't the easiest thing to do, but I would appreciate it if a company could just say "that demo is unavailable for some time" instead of stringing me out.

It is quite possible the moisture will work through the entire assembly untill everything is equally damp. Nylon is hygroscopic; it hunts for water. If you hung one wet canopy in a room with several dry ones, and waited long enough, they would all get equally damp. I wouldn't recommend washing only part of the rig without dissasembly...personally, I would jump in Hawaii with a dirty rig any day.

I would agree with some of the other people on this thread in that information such as this is hard to come by. Sure, a rigger *should* be able to see this stuff, but frankly, I don't think most riggers look that closely at a reserve, let alone a main. As far as construction goes, I know of no canopy/manufacturere that clearly has a problem with canopies coming apart. Because of that, construction is a sort of secondary quality to me. I am more interested in how they fly, and that becomes fairly subjective...you could preach to the end of time about the flight qualities of a given canopy; I still just might simply not like those qualities and therefore not buy the canopy. I would definitely agree that no one company is king of the parachute industry...a buyer should be open minded and willing to try different companies. However, it is not really practical to demo all of the canopies in a particular class. Looking fo a high-performance 9-cell elliptical would consist of demoing a Stiletto, Heatwave, Vengeance, Samurai, Nitron, Crossfire, Cobalt, and probably others. It would take a long time to do this. I think most buyers demo 2 or 3 canopies at most...getting to jump all of them in a reasonable amount of time would be very lucky. Good information on manufacturing parachute equipment is hard to come by. No one really ever talks about what type of joint to look for, what type of hardware, should this piece of fabric be reinforced, should it be cut on the bias, etc. I don't think many people really look at this stuff and frankly I think there are a lot of people who don't really care.

You probably have your brakes real long. The "too short" brakes on the Stiletto I have jumped still have slack, and can get all the way into front risers without deflecting the tail. Ask anyone who jumps theam at higer wingloadings; Stilettos are known for having a short control range; Safires are not.

You probably have your brakes real long. The "too short" brakes on the Stiletto I have jumped still have slack, and can get all the way into front risers without deflecting the tail. Ask anyone; Stilettos are known for having a short control range; Safires are not.

Hey Dee, If you are jumping the same size safire that I think you are, you will have to downsize to go to a Stiletto. Check the sizes and make sure. In any case, the Stiletto will be a lot twitchier, and may seem faster. If you go with the same size, be prepared for a much different toggle stroke. The Safire probably has a pretty long control range. With the Stiletto, everything will happen much higher up in the stroke. It will also have a higher stall speed, so be prepared to run out the extra speed on landing. I doubt your safire bowties real easy, but with the Stiletto it is pretty easy to do on landing...I watched Phil do it a couple of times with his when he first got it. Be especially cautious if you have to downsize...it will be even faster and twitchier. I haven't seen you fly for a while, so I can't really say if you'll be alright. Just be careful.

I hadn't heard of that. I'm sure they do change things as time goes by...they just haven't made many of the "your canopy is grounded until we make this change" type of changes.

Still cold. We moved the business up to Paxton. We're now called "Illinois Skydiving Center". We are going to be the FBO at Paxton, so we manage the airport(

The early Sabres in the big sizes (190 and 210) suffered from extremely hard openings...they were fixed by changing the brake setting method (only the three outer brake lines are set, the inner one is left free) and maybe changing the slider. Since then, the Sabre has proven to be an excellent canopy. To my knowledge, PD has not had a recall since then, and has introduced at least 6 new canopy designs, all of them highly successful. Keep in mind that PD was still a fairly young company at the time of the Sabre introduction...they probably didn't have the capital or the experience they do now. Also, the other Sabre class (9-cell square zp) canopies I can think of (Strong Z-po, Precision Monarch) generally open harder then the Sabre.

Hey Deanne...I thought that might be you...it's C.J. from ISS in Rantoul.