TomAiello

How many of those new kids have died because they didn't have the right skis, or because no one taught them how to avoid avalanches? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I thought that went without saying (or at least had already been said earlier in this thread). The construction methods are noticeably different in the Toxic PC's (and, in my opinion, better), and there are several other differences, as well. Non-centered vents are also available on standard (non-pie slice) pilot chutes from Morpheus, although as far as I know they are the only manufacturer aside from Asylum (on the Toxic) doing the non-centered vents. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

What's the deployment like? Looks complex. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Honestly, I've got a ton of video of various PC's, including Toxics, being used in FJC's here, with the same delays and conditions on back to back jumps of the same load. I don't, however, currently have that video on-line, nor do I have the time to digitize it all and put it up on-line right now. My feeling, from watching those deployments (and the video) is that there is no noticeable difference in actual use. But that's just my feeling--I haven't had the time to do an actual frame by frame comparison and analysis. If anyone wants to come copy all my FJC tapes and hunt through them to do that analysis, they're welcome to do so. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Your question is assuming a purpose. Maybe the purpose is different? For example, with pie slices, it's possible to shape the PC into a different shape than the flat round that a single cut of ZP forms, by simply altering the shape of the triangle you make for each pie slice. Rotating the block/bias allows you to keep the minimum stretch. This applies across the segments (where there are no tapes on either design) I'd say that there is definitely a measurable difference, in terms of stretch, if you are measuring on a table, with an actual ruler. Whether that makes any difference in real world use is another question entirely. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

The Incidents forum is for actual discussion of specific, real incidents. I've moved this thread to Safety and Training. Please refrain from posting theoretical questions like this to Incidents. Thanks! -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Not necesarily. Reliability demonstrated through years of use is a valid reason for continuing to use something. It has the benefits of real-world proof. Newer technologies only have the benefits of reasoning, logic, and testing. None of those is actually as strong as real-world proof. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I'm at a complete loss why PCs with the traditional attachment point still exist. For ten bucks extra the loop style attachment is a no-brainer. For many years, the loop style was not available from any major manufacturer. They had made the decision that the ease of manufacturing the non-loop style was greater by enough to justify making all their stock PC's in that style only. Around '99 or 2000, Colin at Paratech started making BASE PC's with the loop attachment and marketing them. That's around the time that the idea started re-circulating through the BASE world. I think the non-loop style has held on just because people are used to it, because many of today's opinion leaders in BASE "grew up" jumping with PC's that had that style of attachment. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Here's an innovative idea for a square round. It sounds like the one you are describing is more like the plus shaped parachutes used to slow dragsters? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

The most current copy of that article is here. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

It's the loop style attachment mentioned in the "First BASE Rig" article linked at the top of this page. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Does that make my hardware and scar tissue "permanent parachuting tatoos?" -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Next to? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I know a BASE jumper who works as ATC at that airport. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Can you give us an idea what fraction of those jumps involved an upward pitch direction? In other words, how many of those were low go and throw stuff (i'm guessing some of them were from BR's little wall?) and how many were longer delays from Malaysian events and such? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Like this? Most traffic is on Wednesday evenings, but you can pretty much go in there anytime that you want, which means if you can find other people who want to chat, there you go. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

80 meters is 262 feet. Jumpable but hardly huge ... He means that 80m is quite tall for a typical wind turbine in this part of the US. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

It depends on how you define the word "Element". -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Abbie told me yesterday that all he has in stock at the moment are Asylum A/V 42" and 46" PC's, no Toxics or regular (non-vented) PC's. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Please review the "Before You Post!" guidelines linked at the top of this forum. We're not going to have a discussion cataloging jumping sites here. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

What leads you to this conclusion? Did you guys test this configuration and come up with problems, or just find them not any better than others? For what it's worth, I've talked to several tandem manufacturers who recommend building drogues in pie slices for increased stability. Some of the other tricks they've come up with (side venting, increasing the size of the mesh relative to the topskin, etc) have yet to be tried in BASE. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I have. I've also watched and shot video of them on back to back to back to back jumps (on the same load, and on successive loads). If I ever get to the end of my list of things to do, I'll try to put some of that video on line. My current impression is that the Toxics are (a) noticeably better built, (b) more durable, (c) have about the same oscillation damping/oscillation rate as other vented ZP pilot chutes, (d) on jumps with little or no oscillation perform the snatch/extraction functions virtually identically to other PC's. I do not think that any PC (ZP, F-111, Vented, Toxic, whatever) that I've ever seen can actually create a faster deployment than any other. I'm not saying that it's not possible--I just haven't seen it yet. I'm a bit at a loss to say how it might be possible (since virtually all PC's will vent the same amount of air--it's just a question of where they do the venting) for one PC to have noticeably more snatch and drag than any other unless one of the two was actually constructed so poorly that it didn't drag well at all (not the case with 95% of the BASE PC's I've seen, and 100% of the BASE PC's currently being sold new). -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

In my opinion, a Span (bridge) is the best first object. It minimizes object strike potential, and maximizes the amount of time you have to react to a potentially bad opening (prior to strike). Be aware, thought, that this is a generalization, and that there are many different spans in the world. Some are good for a first jump, and some are very, very bad. It's impossible to generalize about object types with too much accuracy. It's far better to pick a specific, real object and talk about that one. For example, the Potato Bridge is an excellent first jump object because it has very low strike potential (I think there's only been one strike on a first jump here, and that was on the canyon wall, and definitely operator error), a huge, wide open landing area, good outs, and a slow moving, broad river underneath as the ultimate out if all else fails. Add to that the legal status and the easy access (sidewalk) to the exit point, and it's all pretty good for a first jump. Take a look at another imaginary span. This one is only about 200' high, and crosses a gorge so narrow that a 90 left or right will put you into an imminent object strike situation (the walls are only about 50 feet apart). The landing area is a sloping boulder field filled with jagged rocks, and the canyon channels the regular wind in the area into a turbulent high speed mess under the bridge. It's illegal to jump, and located in a state park with security personnel, and no good way out of the bottom without getting busted. One of these spans is not like the other. One of them is a good choice for a first jump, and one of them is not. The same thing applies when you compare a span to (for example) a cliff. A terminal cliff with good support, available instructors and a good landing area is going to be better than the 2nd span (and maybe some other spans). Generalizing doesn't work very well in this situation. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

You might want to search through this forum for the thread titled Pie Slice Pilot Chutes. In summary, cutting each slice individually allows the block/bias to be rotated, resulting in a PC that essentially has no overall bias (hence is significantly less prone to deformation than a standard "one circle" cut PC). -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I agree with JJ on about 99% of this. The F-111 PC will move to bridle stretch (to the side), then come back to center, and then inflate in the ideal position, centered over the jumpers back. The ZP PC will tend to inflate when it hits bridle stretch, off to one side, which tends to increase the rate of oscillation during deployment, which is one factor that reduces heading performance. To dramatically oversimplify: F-111 PC's tend to give better opening heading than ZP. (please remember that's a real oversimplification of a much longer and more complex process) One thing that can bring ZP up to the standard of F-111 in this regard (point of initial inflation relative to jumper/pack tray) is the direction of the jumpers pitch. If you are pitching directly upward (as popularized by DW and RS for ultra low freefalls) at exit, your ZP PC will inflate in the same position as an F-111 PC (directly over your back). The F-111 is still better "vented" (since it's essentially equally vented across it's entire surface) than the ZP, and can dampen further oscillations better, but that's not terribly important because, assuming good (symmetric) attachment, further oscillation is unlikely (and of small magnitude if it does occur). So, for very low freefalls, with a directly upward pitch, I'd still want to go with ZP over F-111. I mostly say this because I know what kind of things the original poster is into. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com