TomAiello

I've edited a significant portion of this thread to remove discussion of specific jumping in a specific location. I did this after discussion with locals in that area, and without effecting the original thrust of the thread. I started that discussion in an aside, so I'm officially slapping myself on the wrist now. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

My experience with my unvented Troll was that the openings were significantly slower and less consistent than with (for example) a Mojo. (As an aside, this was one of the reasons I found the "Troll is just a copy of the Mojo" to be bunk--much as the later "Ace is just a copy of a Troll" urban myth is also totally wrong. The three canopies have easily noticeable differences in openings and flight, and I tend to think that anyone who believes they are knockoffs of each other--in whatever order--simply hasn't jumped all three canopies.) When jumping my Troll initially (before the MDV was added) I made about 50 jumps on it and noticed that pressurization was very inconsistent. The canopy would experience (asymmetric) pressure waves during secondary inflation (after bottoms skin expansion) that would roll in different directions on different openings. I couldn't explain why this was happening, aside from the observations that the slider down openings seemed to take noticeably longer than the other canopies I had experienced. I speculated that the slow secondary (cell) inflation allowed more time for the random factors to come into play. I think it's very important to note that I'm discussing my particular unvented Troll. This was a relatively early Troll in the US, although I do know that I know another jumper who demoed one prior to this and felt the low airspeed openings were so poor that he nicknamed it "the jellyfish." I believe this was prior to a crossport enlargement which improved pressurization. Another thing to consider: I've often found folks with experience on only one canopy (or perhaps a handful of jumps on other canopies) touting their canopy as "opening best", or "having hard openings", or some other qualitative assessment of performance, with no basis for comparison. I've especially noticed this with a number of European jumpers reporting "hard" openings on Trolls. After some side by side comparisons, it turned out that the openings they thought were "hard" or "clean" were in fact much softer than openings on other canopies. At any rate, I always increase greatly the size of the salt grain I take when hearing reports on canopy performance form jumpers who have less than 100 jumps on at least two other canopies as a basis for comparison (this is one of the reasons I treasured DW's canopy opinions so much--he had more than 100 jumps on at least 5 different BASE canopies). Sorry to lecture. I hope I'm not coming across as condescending or offensive. I've just run out of time to re-edit this, so I may come back later and try to soften the tone. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

In theory, I think it could. In practice, I haven't seen it. I think it probably has to do with packing style. Specifically, how well your packiing style is adapted to dealing with the slider down there. I've seen people who just sort of wad it up down there, and other people who carefully quarter and fold it. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

i look in your profile and see you have 170jumps(skydives i guess). Honestly, Jaap is one of the best prepared BASE students I've seen. He not only taught himself to pack before his FJC, but he actually took _two_ separate FJC's (one from me and one from Vertigo) so that he was able to be exposed to multiple methods, and do some more post-FJC skills under supervision, with Jimmy. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I have it from very reliable sources that there were three round jumps made off the Big Stone in the 60's. Two ended with major injuries and one was a walk-away. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Doug, I love you man. It's good to see you in your old form, with a little less bitterness. Perhaps I need to come see you and the boys. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Just watch ... Tom's going to lock this thread at 9999 Hey, it's friday night. Tom's waaaaaay too drunk to be Mr. Moderator Man. So I guess it's kind of a free fire zone for the next 12 hours or so, until I wake up sober Saturday morning... -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Oh yeah, that's a great idea...good luck with that. I PCA'd TM off the bridge here with a similar setup a few months ago. It was...interesting. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Me too! Hmmm. Maybe I'll start making some phone calls. But I bet I could just buy a stock canopy and have someone sew in valves in various places. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

There are several documented cases of jumpers before WWII (this was in an age when to become a skydiver you had to sew your own parachute) making BASE jumps. I even know of one guy who rode a motorcycle off a 1000 foot cliff in the 30's. And we like to think of ourselves as intrepid... -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I've long wanted one of those. As an added bonus, the canopy ought to stay pressurized in full stall, which would make double riser stalls (to avoid imminent object strike) much nicer, and less costly of altitude. I know that Vertigo was once talking about prototyping an airlocked BASE canopy (I believe it was called the Shaman). I'm not sure where that project ended up, other than the obvious (it never made it to public release). But perhaps now that they've got the valved Rock Dragon, Apex might consider revisiting the topic (hint, hint--I know you read these forums Jimmy). As long as I'm dreaming, why not add airlocks on the tail as well, so that the canopy could take in air from that end during a double riser maneuver, and essentially "fly" (yes, I know the airfoil doesn't work that way) backward? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I've long been a fan of my old Petzl Guru. But it sucks if I'm trying to wear it under a rig, so I've got some others for that. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I really think a high drag, high lift suit (like, say SG) is the way to go for anyone thinking about trying to land. Using the speed=lift suits (which in my opinion generally have better glide ratio) ought to yield higher total speed. I have seen SG and S3 flown by the same (not super experienced) pilot. It looked to me like the S3 had superior glide angle, but the SG was noticeably slower in both (forward and down) dimensions. I'll send a case of beer to the first person to land a wingsuit, wherever in the world it happens.

This is especially true on many American objects. We often find ourselves on towers in woods, where the only clear landing is right at the base of the tower. You end up pulling high because you need to be able to fly back to the landing area. Truthfully, I'm not sure that the wingsuit designs have progressed to the point where the lift=glide=hang time thing is necessarily completely true in practice, yet. I've seen Sugar Glider pilots getting more hang time, but worse glide, than S3 pilots. Obviously, this is going to depend (as is pretty much everything wingsuit related) completely on the pilots themselves. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I want: 1) Best possible glide angle. 2) Suit that is easy to launch stable in dead air. This is important to me because launch stability is sometimes a life or death issue to me. 3) Simple, easy to use cutaway system that eliminates all restriction. I'd also like a cutaway system where it was impossible to accidentally drop the handles (it's a pain to hang on to them, sometimes, and I've found that I always end up carrying an extra set for that reason). I cut away the wings on virtually all my wingsuit jumps. Ease of re-assembly would be a plus, too, but is not as important as function. 4) A suit that starts flying at lower (vertical) airspeeds. If it could somehow be flying the moment of launch, that would be ideal. Impossible perhaps, but ideal. 5) Easy to hold physical position. 6) A suit that "wants" to fly in the right position. I've heard reports that wings with mylar stiffeners not only hold their shape better, but "push" the jumpers arms into the right configuration. I can't report this personally, but have heard it from multiple experienced jumpers who were testing S3+ prototypes with mylar ribs. I'd also like a variety of strange things, like a self-stabilizing wing profile and some kind of convertible covers I could use to help streamline the main lift web (i.e. cover up the handles) when I was jumping gear that doesn't have front handles for in flight use. Well, you asked... -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

At one point Robibird created some prototype S3+ suits that had a stiffener sewn into the trailing edge. I believe this was partially an attempt to reduce flapping. I'm uncertain if he got good results, or if he's incorporated such a stiffener into the V-1 (perhaps UncleCharlie can tell us). You might try asking Robert, or, as this prototype was made when he was part of Birdman, just asking someone over there. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I know that Nick DG has some copies of old BASE related magazines (as he used to publish one back in the day). I also believe that Zennie acquired a stack of some a while back (I think from Rick or some other old timer, but I'm not sure). There have been several different attempts at BASE related papers/magazines. I know that Dwain once showed me one he put together early on, in Oz, and Avery and Mick at different times published a newsletter called "The Rockhopper" (I think Jason B. had final custody of that project, but I could be wrong). I think it would be a very worthwhile project to scan and .pdf them for historical value. I'm not sure how the publishers would feel about that, and, of course, their permission would be necessary. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Atair Aerodynamics has such a device. They even once offered to loan it out for canopy tests, if such tests could be done from an aircraft, at sufficient altitude and with reserve systems to protect their (expensive) gear. Unfortunately, I was unable to line up the necessary things, and couldn't pursue it further. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Repost of a repost, I'm afraid. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Could be. Although if you are buying a Troll, wouldn't you just have to send it to Stane in Slovenia? So that would actually be the least shipping for retrofit of your canopy options. Still, I think that the Troll in particular has poor enough openings unvented that it's worth buying the MDV option up front. It's also got very well designed valves, which, in my opinion, are superior to the other options on the market (I feel strongly enough about this that I once had another manufacturers canopy retrofitted with MDV style valves by a third party). -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Interesting analogy. Especially from someone who has experienced not so friendly people with assault weapons trying to do him in. BASE for me is, on the good days, not about adrenaline at all. It's more of a Zen experience, where I become calmer, rather than more excited. I'm not a musician, but I have known two concert level pianists. Both seemed to enter a similar focused-but-unfocused Zen-like state while playing. I have a lot of random thoughts on this one, too. I've gone so far as to try to push myself into a similar state of mind in a variety of other ways. None, so far, has had as a high a success rate (for me) as BASE. Perhaps it's time to learn to play an instrument. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

I don't think that most people are too worked up about Miles using the self-appelation of "famous." It's totally in keeping with his (sort of tongue in cheek, very casual) personality. He's a very nice person, and definitely doesn't take himself too seriously. The underlying issues have nothing to do with sponsorship or self promotion. I wish him all the best in those regards. My concern is the flaunting of the law at precious legal objects, and the teaching of students with no skydiving experience. Two very separate issues. One makes me laugh. One makes me cry. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Another thought that just hit me. Every manufacturer is willing to retrofit their canopies with secondary inlets of some kind. It would be just as easy to have them added later, when you know you want the, (and know you want to spend the money). -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

No. The reason I say this is that I have taken exactly the same canopy and sewn vents (no valves--this was before valves were released) into it. Using the same deep brake setting as before (which was properly set), the canopy began experiencing back surge. When I reported this phenomenon to the manufacturer, their response was "don't worry, we're taking the deeper setting out of all future canopies, and telling people not to change them, so it shouldn't be a big issue for most people." I believe the backsurge occurs because the air forced up into the canopy through the nose is then pushed out the nose, forcing the canopy backward in a classic "action-reaction" way. This backward motion momentarily stalls the wing. However, if you experience back surge, but do not touch the control inputs (I did this too, off a bridge, to examine this phenomenon), the canopy then begins to fly (slowly, as it is in deep brakes) and is not stalled. In fairness, I do not know that anyone has really analyzed this phenomenon in depth. The closest I've seen to an attempt was done by Consolidated Rigging, during the development of the Blackjack canopy, when they attached streamers to various points to track air flow, and the canopy was deployed numerous times in various brake configurations (some of them too deep). -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com

Because we often get rhetoric shouted so loudly that it drowns out research into facts and thoughtful analysis. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com