3mpire

That is gnarly!! Wow. I'm not familiar with the Parafoil is that a canopy that is not designed to go to terminal, thus requiring a pocket that large? I'm thinking maybe accuracy given its size and the body position in the photo, so sub terminal hop and pop style exits right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUx8NEbsIa8 whatever

Thanks Jerry for the tip, I found the study I believe you were referring to here: http://www.pcprg.com/hardop.htm I wanted to post the link in this thread in case someone in the future finds it via search and wanted to read the linked information as well. Thanks again everyone, I appreciate the shared knowledge! Edited: I've been informed that the link above is not accessible to all, so for the sake of future visitors I've excerpted a portion of the content so you get the main points:

Thank you everyone for all the information I'm learning a lot about the subject. Would it be an accurate statement to say that a jumper should not care if it is flat packed or propacked? In other words, is there a legitimate reason for a jumper to have a strong preference for one packjob over the other? I know that sometimes people have a preference for something that is a matter of personal preference where the alternative is also perfectly functional. That preference may be based on technique or established habit, so the benefit is convenience or efficiency but the performace/reliability (the output) is no better or worse. Is that the case here?

That's what piqued my interest. If the manufacturer says do it one way but there may be a preference for the other, I'm curious as to A) why the different packs make such a difference that one is "legal" and the other isn't B) why a manufacturer would say one or the other is the *only* way you should do it. Does it have to do with how quickly the pack job opens? How it fits in the container? My assumption is one of the two is better for the manufacturer from a liability standpoint and the other is preferable to some jumpers because it won't be a slammer or something. But that's just a WAG on my part!

Does it matter if a reserve is flat packed or pro packed?

Makes sense -- I'll look for the studies and keep learning. thanks for the explanation and the tip!

Interesting - that makes a lot of sense. It's interesting to me that even a little extra fabric can have a measured affect on how the air hits and opens the canopy.

Yes that makes sense - now that I look at the photo more closely I see that it is on the front. I'm assuming its on the front so you have easier access to draw strings not because it matters during deployment?

Ah I get it. That makes sense. So basically the pocket is attached to the back (tail) of the slider and adds more drag causing the slider to come down more slowly, correct? Is the goal to have it actually inflate almost like a cell or just billow out like another mini slider? In terms of reliability, do you mean that it might not inflate until the slider is already partially down the lines? What effect would that have on the opening? Just not as smooth? Is a pocket slider always a custom addition or are there some designs from the factory that have this configuration or would they just go with a bigger slider or a dome slider? Ah that's a clever design. The idea is by having the material only connected to the front and back "edge" of the slider (what do you call that btw?) you can have more material creating more surface area and therefore more drag, right? Basically you get a bigger slider effect within the same dimensions of a smaller slider? What purpose would having mesh between the left and right edge and the center material serve versus just open? reduced risk of a toggle fire getting threaded through the slider?

From this thread there was some conversation about a pocket slider or a dome slider. Can someone explain the difference between the two? From the context of the conversation a pocket slider sounds like a regular slider with perhaps an extra piece of material added to increase drag whereas a dome slider is an entirely different cut of material for the slider (I'm envisioning an inverted ice cream cone). My google fu was unable to find images or detailed explanations of either. (on a side note searching for pocket sliders did lead me to hand bags made from old parachutes. oh la la!) So of course I understand what a "normal" slider looks like and how it functions. Can anyone show me a picture of what a pocket slider and a dome slider look like, and maybe a little about how they're different in terms of affecting the opening sequence of a square main?

don't tease me bro

I did a static line jump because I always wondered if I could jump out of a plane or not. I didn't do a tandem because that wouldn't prove anything to myself. I had no intention of becoming a skydiver. When I landed and my instructor asked me if I was going to get my A license, I realized that I hadn't even considered it until right then. Granted by most standards I am still in "tourist" territory but to be honest I can't imagine not having this sport as part of my life. It's more than a hobby to me, but it's not that way for everyone. The only thing for you to do is try it for yourself and see what you think.

Most of my jumps are out of a grand caravan. conventional wisdom I've heard is that there is less fuel burn and the annual maintenance costs are lower on a caravan versus a twin otter. is this true? if you could choose between running a grand caravan or a twin otter, which would you choose as a pilot, jumper, and owner?

iFly Seattle is close to two USPA drop zones, and you could easily jump all day at either of them and then fly in the tunnel all night. It's about 1-1.5 hours by car depending on traffic from either DZ to the tunnel.

That man is an inspiration. The first time I saw that video I was blown away. That quote you highlighted is timely.

It would be interesting to do a side-by-side comparison of documented fatalities (related to pilot error under good canopy) for the U.S. and U.K. to see if one could draw a reasonable conclusion that these simple steps are demonstrably more effective.

You're seriously still talking like this barely one week since what happened at snohomish? What's wrong with you.

That's exactly what the NAS I referenced earlier does: insert media and press button: I think it's a great setup for quickly backing up media.

The Synology or other similar NAS products *is* a computer. A server, actually, but it has a (Linux-based) operating system none-the-less. Just plug in your card reader before you go and make sure all is well and you're on your way :)

True though there are ways to convert those to USB w/o a computer http://item.mobileweb.ebay.co.uk/viewitem?itemId=270572011349

Get a DS213air by Synology. It has a builtin wifi hotspot so you can have devices connect to directly via wireless without needing internet connectivity. It supports USB 3.0 so you can get up to 5gbps directly connected. Alternately, you could get one of their models that has an SD card reader. All you do is put the SD card in the slot and press a "copy" button and it'll hoover everything on the SD into the NAS and you're good to go. I don't work for them or anything I'm just a fan of their network attached storage devices.

I think this was the primary source of my question. Since I don't fly these canopies and haven't done a serious investigation of exactly how these canopies relate to each other, I tend to put them into a general "hi performance" bucket. That a katana 170 is appropriate but a velo 170 isn't even manufactured validates that my basic understanding was in the ballpark, I just don't know enough about the individual platforms to know which would cut off at what sizes. edited to add: I understand that a katana is elliptical and a velocity is cross braced, so they're different sub classes, but in terms of how these different designs need to be loaded and what happens under different loadings is not something I understand enough to be able to articulate in a meaningful way. no offense intended to my anvil shaped brothers, i don't deny your right to fly the canopy you want at less than the speed of sound

That distinction makes sense, thanks for working that out for me. I figured jumper weight was a factor I was just making the incorrect assumption that heavier jumpers would want both the performance and speed. I was working under the assumption that for many of these wings, the performance required a higher wingloading. i.e. a design might be intended to have a minimum wingloading in order for its intended flight characteristics. Perhaps that is still true, I just wasn't taking into account the full spectrum of body types. But that's why I asked, sometimes your assumptions are right and people who *know* confirm it, or they give you additional information you hadn't considered and you learn a little. Thanks!

I've never understood why you have hi performance wings available in relatively large sizes. For example, a Katana 170. By the time someone is going to fly that class of wing, it seems unlikely to me that they would fly one that large. For example if you're flying a Sabre2 135 and you want to move to a fully elliptical, going all the way back to a 170 isn't what people do. But by having it that large, you start getting into wing loadings that less experienced folks can rationalize. So why even sell them at that size? Is there a "good" reason? Manufacturers wouldn't make and sell a wing at that size if there wasn't a market for it... so who buys them that should be buying them?