pchapman

That reminds me, I hear that Skydive America Palm Beach was an awesome DZ in the late 90s. Cheap loads, highly experienced load organizers, etc. Which the DZO could afford because he was defrauding his investors big time. It would have been cool to skydive there. All the benefits of crime, without the personal legal responsibility!

To continue to try to hash this issue out for the OP, a freefly suit isn't always the right size to mix in with the typical RW jump. It might happen to work out due to your personal combination of weight & height, or work out if you are already skilled at RW, or if your buddies are using similar suits. The OP can ask experienced jumpers at the DZ about it. So trying to use a freefly suit for RW MIGHT work. But, without knowing any other factors, it is more likely to harm your RW progression with people other than coaches who will adjust their fall rate to yours. Freefly suits are generally baggier than RW suits, although there's overlap especially for heavier guys, or tighter modern freefly jumpsuits. (For the experienced freefliers: Are they recommending a very tight freefly jumpsuit for novices from the start, or do they still recommend something baggier for learning?)

Even if the Skyhi pics are worth the money to get them all nicely printed & laminated etc., yes the spanwise construction on the lower skin with different colours is slightly confusing. More of a concern is that some photos are taken "infront" of the lines, like from a belly cam, rather than "behind the lines", as if you craned your head back to look up at the mess. (At a DZ I'm at, one instructor turns those pics around so the line orientation seems right, but then the canopy is facing the wrong way...) So there are a couple improvements to make if the photos were ever updated.

Chutingstar provided your answer JohnRich. But you can always try claiming that it's now a paperweight (with a cool LCD display), not an AAD in your rig. Rip the labels off it, just like taking the orange 'TSO label' off a reserve canopy (Though AAD's aren't actually TSO'd).

"Slots": Great to see new pics and hear the history from the designer. I had seen the Teuge pics but little information was out there about the canopies. (Interesting too that even a main canopy had to be approved for regular jumper use in the UK. Does that sort of regulation still apply?? )

That's what they say. Django Firefly with direct line attachments, co. sued by Para Flite holding the patent, reappeared with flare attachments as the Glide Path Firelite. Thanks.

Proprietary? Hah! (Yes this is an old thread.) I just took apart an old Astra battery pack. Under the plastic wrap it is just 3 Duracell 2/3A lithium batteries nicely soldered together with custom terminals at the end of the pack. Those 2/3A = "two thirds the size of an A battery" units are also known as CR123 camera batteries. The 3V are in series so the Astra works on a nominal 9V. Soldering batteries together reliably isn't trivial so I wouldn't start buying the individual Duracell batteries locally. But FXC could have made a battery holder instead of insisting on buying packs from them. Not that it matters much, nobody really uses Astras, their adverts were hokey, they never updated their web page, and it sounds like their code was extremely simplistic.

Anyone recall how the openings on the Firelite were as a main canopy? (Or in the reserve canopy version?) Were they typical for 1980's F-111 style canopies, fairly rapid but not hard?

Hi Jerry, It is true that "Flares" and "Para-Flite" are words not normally seen together! I'm interested in this stuff but don't have any special sources of data, so I'm back to digging things out of Poynter's: Poynter's actually has a 9 cell Para-Foil of 200 ft sq, shown under the Para-Flite section -- but stating "only a small number were made". How does this make sense? A simplified chronology: 1964 - Jalbert & his Jalbert Aerology Laboratory, Inc. develops the rectangular ram air wing, "Para-Foil" 1968 - his mesh nosed Aerial Sled 1972 - marketing rights sold to Aero Foil Systems, who made the Para-Sled. The company soon went under. 1974 - Rights were sold to North American Aerodynamics (who continue to make modern 'Foils) Meanwhile for Steve Synder, as he got into things other than AAD's & altimeters: 1968 - worked with the Jalbert Para-Foil to invent the top skin rope based Pilot Chute controlled Reefing. 1969 or 1970, to 1973 - Produced the Para-Plane, with direct line attachment rather than flares. So there was a time when other companies didn't have rights to the Para-Foil, where Synder worked with Jalbert before going to his own direct line attachment ideas. So a small run of Para-Flite Para-Foils in say the late 60s is plausible. Getting back to the canopy in the original post, I figure it pretty much has to be a Jalbert design, particularly if the reefing was added later. I'm guessing it was one of those named a Para-Foil rather than some other specific name. While a 9 cell was built by Para-Flight, perhaps Jalbert made some at his own company too.

While it is a 9 cell with A thru D lines, the heavy construction is very similar to the Jalbert designed Para-Sled. That would make me guess that it is an early Para-Flite Jalbert-designed Para-Foil of a similar era. But I didn't think they had pilot chute controlled reefing using a spider slider at the time; that came later when NAA was making newer styles of Para-Foils. The photos perhaps suggest that the reefing system was added later? So I'll stick to my GUESS that it is a Para-Flite built Para-Foil, back when there was just one Para-Foil and not a choice of sizes and cells. The Knights certainly experimented with different early canopies -- eg, in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Jydpjt0L4k, they've got rounds, early squares (long lined Para-Plane?), and Rogallos (Delta II I think).

Winter is the perfect time to practice Superman landings. Here's a pic I took on the weekend of a guy with 150 jumps doing one.

He did say it was just his opinion, for his own purchases. Maybe he doesn't mind the hassle of packing all ZP over having the F-111's porosity increase rapidly, even if using it on the bottom skin shouldn't theoretically lead to large performance losses over time. And it isn't as if he is doing something weird -- most skydivers only fly ZP style materials anyway. So, by the way, anyone know how well Silhouettes are holding up relative to all-ZP canopies over many jumps? (Got any special access to data?

How about the stats for 2009 in that other category -- skydivers killed in skydiving-related aircraft crashes?

You're right Jerry. For a more authentic old style, you need hard toggles of some sort, like thick dowel, right? And then what was traditional, stow them in an elastic keeper band?

I've had no problem with toggles on rear risers on one PC (as I mentioned earlier that I did). There's some rubbing of the 550 cord on the riser, as it goes from the back towards the center of the canopy where all the brake cascades are. It made sense (less rubbing) to route them to the inside of the risers rather than around the outside. It seems no big deal if one is only putting a handful of jumps on it per year. Still, it's a simple rigging job to put a couple rings and velcro on the back of the front risers. [edit] I checked my photos from this summer when Beatnik jumped his original UT-15 canopy & harness system for the first time. It has the toggles on the back of the front risers, FWIW.

Another test: Anyone who continues in the sport beyond just doing a tandem or two for fun is going to have a log book, otherwise they could never have progressed through their instruction as an actual skydiving student. For a student it is the instructor who normally writes in the evaluation and signs for every jump. A student or newly licenced skydiver might not own any other skydiving equipment, but they'll hold onto that logbook. At least if you don't end up with a boyfriend you'll have more time to spend at the dropzone.

I've even seen them on one jumper's custom BASE rig's leg straps. Personally I'd need to learn a lot more about those snaps first, even if I've seen them in paragliding...

Double keels sure do suck a lot less. Jerry Swovelin has mentioned how the Double Keels can go into a stable backwards flight mode. It is rare but can happen on opening. I've been told it was confusing before the phenomenon was really recognized, especially if it happened to a student who started drifting off into the distance with control inputs seemingly reversed. In any case, this is an excuse to post a couple pics that I may not have used yet: pic 1 Me flying Murray Stevens' Dactyl backwards. Landed it with a backwards roll and no flare. Oops, I got the risers switched when hooking it up. The line configuration is a little weird when laid out to flat pack. (The photo is quite steady, considering that when Beatnik took it from under his Double Dactyl, he was laughing his ass off at my predicament.) pic 2 My Sensor, a licensed almost-copy of a Double Dactyl by Ross Witte of Elsinore. Nice Sailwing CRW pic, 33zulu! Very rare. [edit] As for dqpacker's vid of Bart Stonestreet: That shows a single keel jumped, with a very sudden stall during the landing flare. Ouch. Don't pull those toggles very far! The one I jump stalls with toggles not much below the shoulders.

Just PD's code for the Stiletto, as used on their canopy labels.

While I've only seen photos it seems like the Seven has a lot of nicely thought out or relatively innovative features. It's interesting to see a magnet-closed line stow pouch on the main bag. Bags with no elastics except for the closing stows have been around, but normally not in regular production. As for the reserve with 2 flaps only, making the freebag heavier and take over the role of the side flaps: Innovative and saves bulk. It seems like another way to let more grit get into the reserve "container", and on any rolled-out landing, rub dirt straight into your freebag. But that's a matter of personal philosophy. They also have an interesting option to order with either type 7 or type 8 harness material, the type 8 being softer & more flexible. Not sure how that's done -- Other brands have done things like having the stiffer, stronger type 7 for the main lift webs, but doubled soft type 8 for chest and leg straps.

(Not sure which thread to post in but this seems to be the current one so I'll stick with it...) Nice rig there in the video! So let's analyze the gear: Custom built Quasar, hip rings, B-12 snaps, double wide leg straps, metal handle cutaway & reserve handles, bellyband throwout. For the jump, one strap around the legs just below the knees, and one around the ankles (with a loop under the feet too to stabilize them). Legs are bent at the knees and brought up close to the body, held in place with maybe 1" wide connector straps on each side, for both the ankle wrap strap and the knee wrap strap. The lower ones attach to the rig at the hip rings, the upper ones to custom fittings at the side of the rig. For both the upper and lower connector straps there are buckles for adjustment, and RSL type snap snackles (with bigger disconnect tabs) to allow the jumper to disconnect them. The tucked position was maintained right to touchdown. Between the tight tuck, and having the upper connector straps, that really hinders access to the handles. It might work a little better to have high mounted, outboard facing handles, more like a tandem rig? Heck, if I tried to get on a plane the way the jump was done, even with a couple thousand jumps and a reputation for doing odd stunts, I'm not sure they'd let me on the plane! So what was planned out for emergency procedures in that configuration? The whole thing with the legs tucked up tightly, that's different from what I've seen with Gimpboogie's jumps. A different philosophy on how to deal with no leg control! In avoiding having legs out but not controlled, one ends up instead in a tight style tuck, which isn't the most naturally stable. I can't recall, but how much tunnel time do you have in controlling the style tuck position? Any idea what the next steps are? Nice job!

There's a book, "The Royal Air Force 1939-45" that has a bit of info on the GQ Parasuit for Defiants, the Irvin Harnessuit for other crews, and the "Flying Suit, Combined Pattern" using silk cords in the harness and 'risers'. (It isn't quite clear if it is from Irvin.) Google books shows some relevant pages (circa p36) but a photo accompanying another mention on about p 45 is not included: http://books.google.com/books?id=iHzWAjDrlb0C&pg=PA36&lpg=PA36&dq=boulton+paul+defiant+parachute&source=bl&ots=Z8u3n8GqRQ&sig=PZ0M48tNbQN7hCl7eLOCBLHCveY&hl=en&ei=tM8_S7C1CZPhlAfW3JGfBw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CCgQ6AEwCTgK#v=onepage&q=boulton%20paul%20defiant%20parachute&f=false Cool stuff - you obviously got me interested in these chutes.

That's funny, I just saw one in the Dec '09 Aeroplane Monthly magazine. Or was that your starting point to start asking more?? Since the photo is of a mannequin at the RAF Hendon museum, it isn't hard to then find some peoples' photos of the Defiant on Flickr that also show the rig. Attached is the page of the article showing parachute info (with parts blacked out and low jpg quality to make it fit). P.S. - Turns out to be from GQ.

Here's what I got from somewhere. Still, double check with the factory to make sure the numbers are right.

Damn! At least he got some new recognition 5-10 years ago when the paragliding world discovered his work. Only the the skydiving world had really noticed his contribution prior to that. Someone in France built a replica Sailwing and paraglided it, although I think he had to scale it from photos and not any original plans. Barish got to travel to one of Europe's big paragliding festivals (St Hilaire) and see all the progress that had been made in 40 years.