Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
Flying a Biplane or side by side

 


dthames  (B 37674)

Feb 5, 2012, 11:45 AM
Post #1 of 57 (2121 views)
Shortcut
Flying a Biplane or side by side Can't Post

A post on a recent thread asked for documented procedures for two out and the SIM was referenced. I recall a conversation in an instructor where we were working on category quizzes. The two out biplane and side by side were being reviewed. The comments by the instructor went something like this..

I know the SIM says you can use the toggles to steer the most forward (for biplane) or most overhead (for side by side) . If you release the brakes on one of the two canopies it could start flying faster and could result in a downplane. The rear risers are the better choice. I would just leave the brakes stowed and steer with the rear risers (front canopy rear risers for biplane, outside most risers for side by side). With two inflated canopies overhead, it is not as critical to flare. But be ready to do the PLF.
<end instructor>

To me this makes good sense. It would be good to hear additional points of view, if there are any.

Thanks
Dan


GLIDEANGLE  (D 30292)

Feb 5, 2012, 12:19 PM
Post #2 of 57 (2098 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dthames] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Try this for some data rather than merely opinions:

http://www.performancedesigns.com/docs/dualsq.pdf


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 5, 2012, 2:58 PM
Post #3 of 57 (2044 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dthames] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

One good indicator of what I had said about "not everybody follows the SIM".

Personally, I'd go with tested procedure over guesswork. Guesswork does not trump testing.

Ask him how are to safely fly with risers if you haven't been taught, and practiced riser flight, flaring and stalls.

You are going to run into more situations where there is more than one way to skin a cat. Your job is to learn and make intelligent decisions for yourself. Just because one person says "A", doesn't mean that "A" is the best solution for you. Well, for anyone else either.

As you are doing here (good job, BTW), get more info...as much as you can. The more you know about a situation, the better equipped you are to make those intelligent decisions.


(This post was edited by popsjumper on Feb 5, 2012, 3:09 PM)


dthames  (B 37674)

Feb 5, 2012, 3:53 PM
Post #4 of 57 (2017 views)
Shortcut
Re: [GLIDEANGLE] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Try this for some data rather than merely opinions:

http://www.performancedesigns.com/docs/dualsq.pdf

That is great information. Thanks.

Pops, I am not in contact with that instructor, so I can't ask him those questions. At the time I had finished my catagory D canopy work, so I don't consider the timing of the statement/conversation out of place.

But the report gives some really good information and Yes test results are better than lesser experience.

Dan


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 5, 2012, 6:54 PM
Post #5 of 57 (1977 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dthames] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I know the SIM says you can use the toggles to steer the most forward (for biplane) or most overhead (for side by side) . If you release the brakes on one of the two canopies it could start flying faster and could result in a downplane.

Even after releasing the brakes on the top canopy, you can still make it fly as if the brakes were stowed, and slowly let them up to see if it will behave. Just fly around with a bit of brakes if needed.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 5, 2012, 7:19 PM
Post #6 of 57 (1957 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
...to see if it will behave.

...another reason why we like to keep the main and reserve similar in size and flight characteristics.


In reply to:
Just fly around with a bit of brakes if needed.
I'm not so sure about this.
IMO, 2-out is not a time to be "flying around".
It's a time for survival finding a place in front of you that you can land safely making minimal control inputs.

Maybe you didn't mean "fly around" as I understood it to mean. The bit about using a bit of brakes if necessary is what I would do, too.


(This post was edited by popsjumper on Feb 5, 2012, 7:21 PM)


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 5, 2012, 7:42 PM
Post #7 of 57 (1940 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Maybe you didn't mean "fly around" as I understood it to mean.

Just meant that you can turn as needed, as little as needed.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 6, 2012, 4:28 AM
Post #8 of 57 (1879 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Thanks. I needed clarification.


dthames  (B 37674)

Feb 6, 2012, 4:54 AM
Post #9 of 57 (1864 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

One of the reasons I have specific interest in this topic is because of a guy at our DZ was hurt last year with a two out. His reserve came out when he was low. His main went out in front and down, pulling him out of control. He tried to "fly it back" up and into a more stable configuration. But he ended up hitting hard on concrete and had spinal injuries.

He never had a stable two out, so it is a bit different. But I would not want a stable situation to become unstable because of something I did. So, I am hunting for the best understanding I can get.

The test report was a help, for sure.

Dan


(This post was edited by dthames on Feb 6, 2012, 4:55 AM)


Scrumpot  (D License)

Feb 6, 2012, 8:42 AM
Post #10 of 57 (1804 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
...another reason why we like to keep the main and reserve similar in size and flight characteristics.

So Andy - Are we then, if you are serious about applying this logic, indeed keeping with that logic, when the 2 canopies, once out and flying, presumably already behaving let's just say - "similar in size and flight characteristics" ...when now one releases the toggles on the front canopy - and entering that one, as opposed to the other into "full flight"?

Seems to me you may have something of a bit of contradiction in terms there, no? - Just playing a little "devils" advocate here is all, and interested to hear how you now reconcile both statements/positions, when one does seem to be actually, opposed to the other.

TIA for playing along.


(This post was edited by Scrumpot on Feb 6, 2012, 8:43 AM)


tkhayes  (D 18764)

Feb 6, 2012, 9:16 AM
Post #11 of 57 (1795 views)
Shortcut
Re: [GLIDEANGLE] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
conclusion: If a biplane is present and the jumper has directional control, leave the brakes stowed on the rear canopy and fly the biplane using gentle toggle input on the front canopy. Do not flare either canopy for landing. Be prepared to do a PLF

I have a lot of issues with the PD report and I also have a lot of issues with the SIM guidance as well.

No, none of it is all 'wrong', but the PD report was from 1992 and that is 20 years ago. A LOT of things have changed- particularly canopy size and performance.

The quote above says 'do not flare' - not flaring any modern canopy today will almost certainly result in serious injury. They are flying a ridiculously higher speeds compared to 20 years ago.

I believe that prevention is the key. DO NOT EVER end up with two canopies out.

It's kind of like scuba diving "What do I do if I find myself at 120 feet with 1 minute of air left?" Well the answer is "You should never have been there and now you are fucked"

There is no good answer for two canopies out. There is no right answer for two canopies out. Every situation can be different and the BEST situation is landing under ONE and only ONE parachute.

So I believe the message needs to be prevention of the said 'two canopy out scenario' and less on what to do about it.

And if it does happen, which should be never, then my best situation is figuring out the best way to get rid of the main so you can land the reserve.


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 6, 2012, 10:06 AM
Post #12 of 57 (1781 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Scrumpot] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Again, releasing the toggles on a canopy does not mean that the canopy must then be at full flight.


yoink

Feb 6, 2012, 10:34 AM
Post #13 of 57 (1766 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dthames] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
His main went out in front and down, pulling him out of control. He tried to "fly it back" up and into a more stable configuration.

Frown


Sounds like someone missed the part on how to deal with a downplane in the FJC.

Hint: the answer isn't 'fly it back up'...


peek  (D 8884)

Feb 6, 2012, 11:12 AM
Post #14 of 57 (1751 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Again, releasing the toggles on a canopy does not mean that the canopy must then be at full flight.

I agree, but I wonder how much skill it would take to do that. Usually we just reach up and give the toggles a little tug, and suddenly we are in nearly full flight.

I suppose we could unstow toggles, and in one motion, go right to half brakes (or however far down they were when stowed) but that would take some skill. I think you and I could do it, but I'm not sure a student or novice skydiver would even _think_ to do it in all of the excitement.

Overall, I am of the opinion that we should teach people to leave the toggles alone in a 2-out situation.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 6, 2012, 3:04 PM
Post #15 of 57 (1691 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Scrumpot] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes....much more so that a 260 main and a 126 reserve
Shocked


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 6, 2012, 3:07 PM
Post #16 of 57 (1689 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I believe that prevention is the key. DO NOT EVER end up with two canopies out.
Oh, hell yes, hell yes, hell yes.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 6, 2012, 3:31 PM
Post #17 of 57 (1682 views)
Shortcut
Re: [peek] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Again, releasing the toggles on a canopy does not mean that the canopy must then be at full flight.

I agree, but I wonder how much skill it would take to do that. Usually we just reach up and give the toggles a little tug, and suddenly we are in nearly full flight.

I suppose we could unstow toggles, and in one motion, go right to half brakes (or however far down they were when stowed) but that would take some skill. I think you and I could do it, but I'm not sure a student or novice skydiver would even _think_ to do it in all of the excitement.

Overall, I am of the opinion that we should teach people to leave the toggles alone in a 2-out situation.

IMO, you answered your own question...we're talking about students who fly tame, docile canopies. Neither canopy is going to all-of-a-sudden speed out and away from the other....even if one is in full flight. Kinda hard for that slow, student canopy to get to true full flight when it's dragging another parachute around behind it.

Out of all the student 2-outs I have seen, including mine as a young jumper, the real problems developed when the student got all radical toggle-jockey with one of them trying to do large-degree turns to get to the dropzone. That's why the emphasis on flying it gently making minimal inputs.

And, yes, students. They will do a lot of not-so-good things even after having been taught and drilled. One thing common is to grab the toggles....and freak out thinking "get home, get home, get home."

Students...have they been taught riser flight and control? If not, then all bets are off on whether or not they can do it successfully....especially with a 2-out situation.

Flaring? Every 2-out student landing I've seen so far have been very soft and well within the range of a successful, bone-saving PLF.

If the testing is out-dated, then let's make a push to re-do that testing. Maybe the test jumpers will come up with different results. I doubt it, but hell, at least the testing gets updated, right?

Personally, I don't understand ignoring positive, proven testing results.

Some or the HP canopies that really do fly fast? Maybe. I'll not address that. I'll leave that discussion to the hot rod boys.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Feb 6, 2012, 3:51 PM
Post #18 of 57 (1671 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

>The quote above says 'do not flare' - not flaring any modern canopy today will almost
>certainly result in serious injury.

Agreed. You'd probably be injured if you did not flare a 2:1 loaded canopy.

But in a stable biplane you're going to have at least twice as much fabric out. And for students, who typically have loadings much closer to 1:1, your loading is now .5 to 1. And _that_ will tend to land you without injury without a flare.

For more experienced jumpers it's a judgment call. My main is a XF2 109 and my reserve is a 143, so it's unlikely they'd be very happy together, especially if I've already released the brakes on the main*. So I'd be more likely to cut the main away if I had an AAD firing.

>There is no good answer for two canopies out. There is no right answer for two
>canopies out. Every situation can be different and the BEST situation is landing under
>ONE and only ONE parachute.

Also agreed. But we don't always get the canopy configuration we want - and especially for lower experienced jumpers, it is often better to leave it alone if it will land you safely.

Would they be better landing under a single main or reserve? Absolutely. But that's not the configuration they have, and the risk of the main snagging the reserve as it leaves is not zero. Thus in many cases to stick with what will save your life instead of cutting away and trying for an option that MIGHT save your life.

(* - I recently changed my opening procedures to look at both toggled before releasing them, both to ensure I don't stick my finger through a loop of line and to ensure I look behind the main to see if I have a reserve. For a while I thought that keeping eyes out the entire time after opening was more important (to look for traffic) but a malfunction caused by a trapped toggle changed my mind.)


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Feb 7, 2012, 11:35 AM
Post #19 of 57 (1600 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

"[reply... but the PD report was from 1992 and that is 20 years ago. A LOT of things have changed- particularly canopy size and performance. ..."

.........................................................................

Student parachutes have not changed significantly over the last twenty years, so we should continue giving the same KISS advice to students.

OTOH canopies for experienced jumpers have changed significantly over the last twenty years. As soon as a fun jumper buys a canopy - that he loads at more than one pound per square foot - he needs to re-think his two-out procedure.


tkhayes  (D 18764)

Feb 7, 2012, 11:59 AM
Post #20 of 57 (1588 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerrob] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Student parachutes have not changed significantly over the last twenty years...

I disagree with that. 20 years ago most everyone was jumping a Manta, and today we have everything on the shelf from a Spectre 170 to a Navigator 300 for our students.

I do not disagree with keeping it simple. However a student with 12 jumps could easily (at a progressive dropzone), be downsizing to a 1:1 wing-loading and to say that they should continue to think that they can land a biplane (IMO) borders on negligent.

So we then need to teach every student what to do on every jump depending on what canopy they have over their head for that particular wing-loading, canopy set etc.

In other words, you cannot use KISS. It is no longer simple and the answer changes with every set of gear they use and every canopy they fly.

Prevention is the key and landing under ONE parachute is always the best option.

I am more inclined to tell my student how to turn a bi-plane into a side-by-side and then chop the main. And if it is anything other than a bi-plane, chop it, because most of the time, they will clear just fine - I have done it myself.

Now if every student regardless of size and/or weight is/was jumping a 288 main and a 260+ reserve, then the issue of landing a bi-plane, arguably is not a bad decision.

My point is that there are far too many different size parachutes out there for students and to tell anyone to land a bi-plane with the performance of parachutes these days is probably going to end up with serious injury - regardless of the possibility of negligence.

Which is worse, the case for negligence or the case for serious injury? How many possible scenarios are you going to try and cram in their heads on a First Jump Course? or at 10 jumps? or at 25 jumps?

Does anyone actually have real statistics on how many main reserve entanglements occur due to cutting away from a biplane? 'cause if we do not, then the advice that ANY of us is giving is pointless.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 7, 2012, 2:55 PM
Post #21 of 57 (1555 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I am more inclined to tell my student how to turn a bi-plane into a side-by-side and then chop the main. And if it is anything other than a bi-plane, chop it, because most of the time, they will clear just fine - I have done it myself.
I'll counter with:
"Most of the time"?
Uh huh.
Compare that "most of the time" with landing a stable biplane.
I'm sure that the stable biplane cutaways and the side-by-side cutaways that resulted in entanglements were freaks of nature and statistical anomalies.

In reply to:
Does anyone actually have real statistics on how many main reserve entanglements occur due to cutting away from a biplane? 'cause if we do not, then the advice that ANY of us is giving is pointless.
So why do you feel compelled to advise young jumpers to destabilize a biplane into a side-by-side and cutaway thereby increasing the risk of entanglement?

You didn't mention situational awareness which is all-important in these situations, BTW.


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Feb 7, 2012, 8:14 PM
Post #22 of 57 (1522 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

T.K.

I agree with half of what you said/wrote.

I still believe in KISS for first (solo) jump students.

As they progress to smaller/faster canopies, they should receive a little more instruction - on canopy control/landing patterns/emergency procedures so that they start to grasp the "bigger picture" by the time they have 25 jumps.


tkhayes  (D 18764)

Feb 8, 2012, 4:03 AM
Post #23 of 57 (1501 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
So why do you feel compelled to advise young jumpers to destabilize a biplane into a side-by-side and cutaway thereby increasing the risk of entanglement?

You didn't mention situational awareness which is all-important in these situations, BTW.

exactly my point, these situations are too complicated to write a paper about it and come up with a 'method'. KISS or whatever, YOUR student may very well get killed or seriously injured following a published procedure.

So don't publish one. Talk about it yes, and give several examples. and then focus on the prevention of any such thing ever happening because you are mostly likely fucked if it does.


melathechamp  (B License)

Feb 8, 2012, 4:39 AM
Post #24 of 57 (1495 views)
Shortcut
Re: [GLIDEANGLE] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

According to the article, it says that you have to disconnect your RSL before cutting away. Why do you have to do that when both canopies are out?


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 8, 2012, 9:56 AM
Post #25 of 57 (1466 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
exactly my point, these situations are too complicated to write a paper about it and come up with a 'method'. KISS or whatever, YOUR student may very well get killed or seriously injured following a published procedure.
Yes. ANY student could be killed with ANY method. The method used should be the one with the least risk of entanglements. Cutting away a side-by-side is a high-risk adventure. I'm glad you were successful with yours.
And God knows, we shouldn't cutaway a stable biplane.

In reply to:
So don't publish one. Talk about it yes, and give several examples. and then focus on the prevention of any such thing ever happening because you are mostly likely fucked if it does.
Well, I would not sacrifice knowledge of what to do when it happens for that. There are too many instances where the problem was created beyond the control of the jumper. I can do everything possible to "prevent" it and it could still happen due to circumstances beyond my control. I want my students to know exactly what to do if it does, YMMV.


AndyMan  (D 25698)

Feb 8, 2012, 12:50 PM
Post #26 of 57 (874 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I do not disagree with keeping it simple. However a student with 12 jumps could easily (at a progressive dropzone), be downsizing to a 1:1 wing-loading and to say that they should continue to think that they can land a biplane (IMO) borders on negligent.

.deletia.


My point is that there are far too many different size parachutes out there for students and to tell anyone to land a bi-plane with the performance of parachutes these days is probably going to end up with serious injury - regardless of the possibility of negligence.

I'm just not seeing this. Is there a long line of students (or experienced jumpers, for that matter) being injured landing bi-planes?

Landing a bi-plane is the way I was taught, and it's the way I teach. Granted, this is a poor rationale for not changing, but so is change for changes sake.

Are skydivers really being hurt landing side-by-sides? I see no evidence here in the incidents forum, or in parachutist.

_Am


wolfriverjoe  (A 50013)

Feb 8, 2012, 2:06 PM
Post #27 of 57 (860 views)
Shortcut
Re: [melathechamp] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
According to the article, it says that you have to disconnect your RSL before cutting away. Why do you have to do that when both canopies are out?
Because even though it isn't going to do anything, it is probably still around the reserve ripcord, and will still need to be pulled out.
It probably will pull free without a problem (if the rig isn't a Racer), but disconnecting it eliminates any chance of it snagging or hanging up or anything.


tkhayes  (D 18764)

Feb 8, 2012, 4:18 PM
Post #28 of 57 (842 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AndyMan] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I'm just not seeing this. Is there a long line of students (or experienced jumpers, for that matter) being injured landing bi-planes?

I do not know, that's also part of my point. We are publishing document stating that THIS is the way to do it, yet I am suggesting that the data is 20 years old. I am NOT INTERESTED (and nor are you I expect) in landing a biplane with a navigator 240 and a Raven reserve.

And I am not convinced that this is what I want to teach my student.

so convince me.


AndyMan  (D 25698)

Feb 8, 2012, 4:20 PM
Post #29 of 57 (840 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I am NOT INTERESTED (and nor are you I expect) in landing a biplane with a navigator 240 and a Raven reserve.

Actually, I don't know that's true at all. I certainly wouldn't land my Velo that way, but should I find myself in such a situation under a big Nav, I probably would try to land both - just for giggles. To be honest, I'm not sure why I wouldn't.

_Am


tkhayes  (D 18764)

Feb 8, 2012, 4:29 PM
Post #30 of 57 (837 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AndyMan] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

again, reinforcing my point. No one knows what the right answer is. We know for a fact that when you have a mal, you pull the handles. When you are at 5000', you pull, no matter what. When you have final approach, you should be on level flight prepared to land.

example. No one says "what do you do if you are NOT at level flight at 200' or suddenly I do a massive hook turn? what do I do?" The answer is "Don't do massive hook turns and BE ON level flight at 200'"

You might land the biplane but I would choose to not do that. Therefore there is no 'right answer' for the bi-plane or two-canopy out scenario. The best we can do is to probably explain the possible options and consequences, and I thin publishing that landing a biplane is not always the best course of action.

"Well land it but you will probably get fucked up" does not sound acceptable to me.

Fine if everyone has 260+ sq ft canopies. Student with 5 jumps or student with small body size flying a sub-190 sq ft canopy has a different answer to that.

And the bottom line? No stats, no data, no reliable information except for that of 20 years ago. not good information today.


AndyMan  (D 25698)

Feb 8, 2012, 4:37 PM
Post #31 of 57 (834 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
"Well land it but you will probably get fucked up" does not sound acceptable to me.

Well, I just don't think that's true. Earlier, you talked about an instructor being negligent if they taught landing. And I just don't think that's true either. These are awfully big concepts you're throwing around, and only because the data is 20 years old?

The data was good 20 years ago. Student canopies haven't changed that much - a big Navigator is not that different than a big Manta or a Raven. Moreover, we have 20 years of students NOT dieing. Why is this a bad thing?

_Am


skyjumpenfool  (Student)

Feb 8, 2012, 5:17 PM
Post #32 of 57 (827 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AndyMan] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Not too many years back on a cloudy day at Couch Freaks...
High speed low pass, 4 jumpers decided to take a 4 way out the door w/out checking altitude. 4 cypress fires putting 2 into a down plane and 2 into side by sides. The two landing the side by sides said they had the softest landings ever with little trouble controling the canopiesCool. The two who landed the downplanes sufferd life altering injuries.Unsure

Side by sides can easily turn into downplanes. So, if you're going to land a side by side, easy on the controls. If your thinking of landing a down plane, DON'T!

Having done some CRW, I've stated in other threads how I'd handle these situations. It's part of my EP thought process. Have a plan and stick to it. If you're a student, use the plan your instuctors gave you.


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Feb 8, 2012, 7:34 PM
Post #33 of 57 (800 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dthames] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

I have landed both biplanes and side-by-sides and biplanes are much easier to land.

Most of my biplanes were deliberately done with a buddy (planned canopy formations with other experienced jumpers.) The bottom guy tends to land hard, but otherwise they are easy to steer, etc.

I have landed on accidental, solo biplane 250 reserve and 290 main) ... after I scared an AAD. That solo biplane was decending so slowly that I did not even try to flare, just slid out the landing on damp grass.

OTOH I have only landed one side-by-side (210 and 200 mains). Again, it was with another experienced Canopy Formation jumper, but we chickened-out and released grips about a hundred feet up. We both swung outboard - under our canopies - and had just enough time to flare before touchdown.

Lesson learned: flaring a side-by-side requires very careful timing, while flaring a biplane is unneeded.


tkhayes  (D 18764)

Feb 8, 2012, 10:14 PM
Post #34 of 57 (785 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AndyMan] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Student canopies haven't changed that much - a big Navigator is not that different than a big Manta

I respectfully and fundamentally disagree with this statement. I stated that earlier. Canopies are different; and we provide a WIDE variety of sizes for students, not one large size for everyone.

I fundamentally disagree with your statement.

And again, we, nor you, have any reliable data BECAUSE it is 20 years old.

No students are not "dying" - but how many of them are landing biplanes with no flare? Again, no data, no analysis, therefore no conclusion.


obelixtim  (D 84)

Feb 9, 2012, 2:48 AM
Post #35 of 57 (770 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
And again, we, nor you, have any reliable data BECAUSE it is 20 years old.

Even 20 years ago, this data was not reliable, simply because it was based on too small a test sample to draw any definite conclusions.

I remember the discussions back then and views were never consistent on the "right" way to do things.

The variation in canopy sizing was also much less of a factor, compared to today. The only consistent attitude was if it was stable and flying nicely, stick with it, but be gentle with it. If things were going haywire, chop.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 9, 2012, 3:21 AM
Post #36 of 57 (771 views)
Shortcut
Re: [obelixtim] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

 
-Keep in mind we are talking about young jumpers.
-The OP is a young jumper asking for input on why he sees published recommendations for one procedure and is getting opposing info from his instructor.
-Keep in mind that we are discussing, not arguing, and the purpose of this thread is to help out the OP and other young jumpers.
-Keep in mind we are addressing only two specific 2-out situations.

The idea here is to get something solid that justifies procedures that differ from the testing publication. What we've have so far is a lot of opinion and little fact-based information for the OP.

The platform is:
The procedures have been tested and best-practice recommendations published.

To those who are questioning the reliability of the testing because of the age of it...

First question:
-Did you, at the time of testing and publication of the recommendations, teach those guidelines to young jumpers?

Second question:
-Did you, at the time of testing and publication of the recommendations, follow those guidelines yourself?

Applying to both questions:
If no...
1. On what foundation, at the time, did you base your non-recommended procedures?

If yes...
1. At what point in time did you change your methods to something other than what was recommended?

2. What, specifically, caused you to make those changes?

3. What, specifically, regardless of the age of the tests, is the justification for doing something other than those recommendations today?


(Note: Again, keep in mind we are talking about young jumpers here who typically have similar-sized main/reserve canopies.)


tkhayes  (D 18764)

Feb 9, 2012, 4:34 AM
Post #37 of 57 (758 views)
Shortcut
Re: [obelixtim] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

thanks for the support. I think we need a real study on the effects of flying two parachutes out of varying sizes and typically wing loading that students have. And no one except perhaps large manufacturers or the military has the resources to do that study.

Some of the given "conclusions" that disturb me:

1. Landing a bi-plane with no flare. Maybe with a Manta and a Raven III reserve with a 170lb student yes. But a 200lb student with a Navigator 240 and a PD 235 reserve?

2. Side by side cannot be cut away safely. I think it can and with probably zero or near-zero probability of entanglement

3. Bi-plane cannot be cutaway with the main in front. It sounds totally logical to everyone, even me, but the fact is that we have no data to support the number of times it might result in a main/reserve entanglement.

We have had a million jumps at Skydive City since I arrived here in 1995. A handful of 2 canopy out situations. Never had one with a student. EVERY TIME, the person cutaway and landed their reserve. I do not remember anyone ever landing two canopies.

So our experience is cutaway - no matter what, but the sample is still too small to make a conclusion, so I do not make that conclusion.

But I MOST DEFINITELY question the logic behind "landing a bi-plane with no flare".

TK


tkhayes  (D 18764)

Feb 9, 2012, 4:34 AM
Post #38 of 57 (758 views)
Shortcut
Re: [obelixtim] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

thanks for the support. I think we need a real study on the effects of flying two parachutes out of varying sizes and typically wing loading that students have. And no one except perhaps large manufacturers or the military has the resources to do that study.

Some of the given "conclusions" that disturb me:

1. Landing a bi-plane with no flare. Maybe with a Manta and a Raven III reserve with a 170lb student yes. But a 200lb student with a Navigator 240 and a PD 235 reserve?

2. Side by side cannot be cut away safely. I think it can and with probably zero or near-zero probability of entanglement

3. Bi-plane cannot be cutaway with the main in front. It sounds totally logical to everyone, even me, but the fact is that we have no data to support the number of times it might result in a main/reserve entanglement.

We have had a million jumps at Skydive City since I arrived here in 1995. A handful of 2 canopy out situations. Never had one with a student. EVERY TIME, the person cutaway and landed their reserve. I do not remember anyone ever landing two canopies.

So our experience is cutaway - no matter what, but the sample is still too small to make a conclusion, so I do not make that conclusion.

But I MOST DEFINITELY question the logic behind "landing a bi-plane with no flare".

TK


(This post was edited by tkhayes on Feb 9, 2012, 5:49 AM)


obelixtim  (D 84)

Feb 9, 2012, 5:34 AM
Post #39 of 57 (744 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
The idea here is to get something solid that justifies procedures that differ from the testing publication. What we've have so far is a lot of opinion and little fact-based information for the OP.

The platform is:
The procedures have been tested and best-practice recommendations published.

My point was simply that the best practice recommendations are not based on a comprehensive testing programme, and the number of test jumps done was not enough to give a solid basis to those recommendations.

My problem was simply, in the absence of anything more comprehensive, these morphed into THE way to do things. Having said that, they generally go along the right lines.....

I am simply saying that any two out situation is a unique event, with its own potential complications. What saves your bacon one day can kill you the next.

The only acceptable advice that could be said to be definite, is simply to treat any two out with caution. Stay cool, assess the situation, and use very small (if any) inputs if the canopies are stable and flying well. Cutting away a good canopy is not a good idea if its not necessay.

In fact a lot of opinion on the matter came from experienced CRW pilots, who did have a lot of experience flying with multiple canopies, and the basis of my training for two outs was influenced quite a lot by CRW experience.

I trained that with a two out biplane, it was best to take both sets of toggles and fly both canopies right to the ground, including flaring on touchdown. I saw this work well in several two out situations where a bi plane developed.

A couple of side by sides developed into downplanes, and the drill in that situation was simply to chop the main when the two canopies started flying apart from each other. I also saw this scenario several times.

What was not allowed for back then was the great disparity in size and speed of main and reserve parachutes we see in use today.

Thus each jumper has to assess what they have and make a decision based on what is happening. It is a question that every jumper should have pondered, particularly when downsizing or jumping new gear.

Review of procedures should be a constant process....

We did a lot of CRW back then, and had a lot of experience with multiple canopies, wraps and the behaviour of canopies in close proximity to each other. One thing for sure that we learned, things can go pear shaped very quickly, so there is a definite need to stay ahead of the game...


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 9, 2012, 5:58 AM
Post #40 of 57 (738 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Perhaps an underappreciated risk of entanglement comes from the RSL shackle.

I would definitely keep a stable biplane, and slighlty/gently flare the front canopy. I do not think there should be enough altitude
for anything bad to happen,


airtwardo  (D License)

Feb 9, 2012, 6:22 AM
Post #41 of 57 (730 views)
Shortcut
Re: [obelixtim] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

 
I have a question~

Is this the data from the Golden Knights testing?


tkhayes  (D 18764)

Feb 9, 2012, 6:34 AM
Post #42 of 57 (728 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Perhaps an underappreciated risk of entanglement comes from the RSL shackle.

perhaps, but perhaps not.


jimjumper  (D 11137)

Feb 9, 2012, 7:43 AM
Post #43 of 57 (716 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

I know I'm replying to the wrong person but for the sake of putting out information, the 2009 PIA Symposium had a lectue by Jim Cowan titled "Dual Canopy & Entanglement Emergency Procedures." If I recall he was researching this very topic and was planning on doing some 100-200 dual canopy jumps to get some data on dealing with this type of problem. I will try to find the actually lecture notes later (sorry but I'm taking my wife to lunch and a movie today.) If I find it I'll post later the data that it contains. Maybe someone with those notes will reply before I can. I think all attendees were given a disc with all the lecture outlines on it.


(This post was edited by jimjumper on Feb 9, 2012, 8:06 AM)


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 9, 2012, 9:06 AM
Post #44 of 57 (694 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I have a question~

Is this the data from the Golden Knights testing?

Yes.


fcajump  (D 15598)

Feb 9, 2012, 12:30 PM
Post #45 of 57 (667 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

(not aimed at PopsJ, just using his post to jump in here)

_VERY_ small sample to include -

Witnessed: 1994ish, scared Cypres two larger early ram-air. Landed stable bi-plane. Almost couldn't put his feed down for the slow decent rate.

Personal: 2008, main slamed me just as I was getting ready to go to plan B. Got both. No RSL. (front) Main - Spectre 230, (back) Reserve Fury. (exit weight ~254) Long story short, choose to chop from biplane. While the risers slapped the underskin of the main, it cleared fine. I can see how during that slap, it could have snagged a line. Decent rate under biplane was very slow and I expect a no-flare landing would have been OK.

This is one of a long list of reasons I like bigger, more docile canopies.

A few years ago, while some of us were attending a dual-out seminar at PIA, Glenn Bangs had a two-out turn to instant down-plane. If I recall correctly he chopped/flared/landed. Might be useful if those with bad outcomes were to post their details.

JW


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 9, 2012, 5:17 PM
Post #46 of 57 (631 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
We have had a million jumps at Skydive City since I arrived here in 1995. A handful of 2 canopy out situations. Never had one with a student. EVERY TIME, the person cutaway and landed their reserve. I do not remember anyone ever landing two canopies.
'Not remembering' is a long, long way from being able to say 'EVERY TIME'.

Which is it?

I can tell you EVERY TIME is the wrong answer.

-I personally witnessed one landing on the other side of the hangar from the packing tent close to the spectator area over there.

-I personally witnessed one landing in the field across the street from the old Sun Path building.

...and that was on only two of my visits to Z-hills.


MRNUTS1960  (A License)

Feb 9, 2012, 5:33 PM
Post #47 of 57 (623 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

For additional information on this subject you can read the "Skydivers Survival Guide 2nd edition" By Pier Media. The did several test jumps for the Break away series I believe. Their conclusions are found on page 150 where they do not agree with the SIM and advise "Do not cut away a stable side-by side or a stable bi-plane". They give an in depth explanation of why they feel that way in the chapter. It runs almost identicle to the report from PD. It does not say exactly how many jumps they did in their testing that I can see or recall from reading the book. At least it is one more source of printed test data to add to the source information when you try to decide. It was published in 2004.


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 9, 2012, 5:55 PM
Post #48 of 57 (618 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MRNUTS1960] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
For additional information on this subject you can read the "Skydivers Survival Guide 2nd edition" By Pier Media. The did several test jumps for the Break away series I believe. Their conclusions are found on page 150 where they do not agree with the SIM and advise "Do not cut away a stable side-by side or a stable bi-plane".

SIM agreement: Yes and no....SIM gives two options with the caveat of "no tangles":

"b. Side-by-side (two alternatives)

side-by-side alternative one
If the two canopies are not tangled, cut away
and fly the reserve to a safe landing

side-by-side alternative two
(1) Steer the dominant (larger) canopy gently
using toggles or leave the brakes stowed and
steer by pulling on the rear risers.
(2) Leave the brakes stowed on the other canopy.
(3) Make a parachute landing fall on landing."

In reply to:
They give an in depth explanation of why they feel that way in the chapter. It runs almost identicle to the report from PD. It does not say exactly how many jumps they did in their testing that I can see or recall from reading the book. At least it is one more source of printed test data to add to the source information when you try to decide. It was published in 2004.

Good stuff, MrNuts. Thanks for providing additional resource info.


MRNUTS1960  (A License)

Feb 9, 2012, 7:49 PM
Post #49 of 57 (595 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

I should have been clearer in my explanation of the books Section two "Deviations from the USPA" as it is not only on the cutting away of side by side but also they have a recommendation for the pilot chute in tow. They also do not recommend releasing the brakes on either a side-by-side or a bi-plane. They have a complete section of the book where they explain why they feel that a deviation should be considered because of their test. I did not explain that very well in my first post.




tkhayes  (D 18764)

Feb 10, 2012, 5:40 AM
Post #51 of 57 (436 views)
Shortcut
Re: [popsjumper] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
'Not remembering' is a long, long way from being able to say 'EVERY TIME'.

Which is it?

I can tell you EVERY TIME is the wrong answer.

-I personally witnessed one landing on the other side of the hangar from the packing tent close to the spectator area over there.

-I personally witnessed one landing in the field across the street from the old Sun Path building.

...and that was on only two of my visits to Z-hills.

Again my point exactly. YOUR experience is land it. MY experience is not to.

Your experience nor my experience has ANY VALID STATISTICAL OR SCIENTIFIC THEORY BEHIND IT.

therefore there is no conclusion. To make one is incorrect. To publish it as 'correct' is further incorrect.

I'm talking to a barn door here and I'm done. I am NOT going to teach my student to land a bi-plane with no flare. Sorry, I am simply not going to do that given the lack of data that we have.




popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 10, 2012, 7:14 AM
Post #53 of 57 (412 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I'm talking to a barn door here and I'm done. I am NOT going to teach my student to land a bi-plane with no flare. Sorry, I am simply not going to do that given the lack of data that we have.
Well, if you are trying to press your way doing things onto this barn door, then yes...you are talking to one.

I thought we had been discussing options and the pros/cons of it all. Some of the options discussed have been useful, some not. If it is now just an issue of flare/no flare, then OK...I don't see a big deal either way....IF the student manages to flare at an altitude that puts him down safely as opposed to too high and folds up one of the two for a crash.

The important part, IMO, was the idea of an automatic cutaway on a biplane or a side-by-side. Those are much more dangerous to the inexperienced youngster.

So far, what I've seen is that some testing is better than no testing. I'm just not one to re-invent the wheel and your reasoning for teaching differently has not convinced me to move away from USPA recommendations.

Bottom line:
You run the place. By all means teach whatever you like.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Feb 10, 2012, 10:33 AM
Post #54 of 57 (398 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

>therefore there is no conclusion. To make one is incorrect.

Well, to draw a conclusion is something we all do. You did it.

The issue is that a biplane made out of two student canopies is fairly stable and will likely land someone safely if they don't mess with it. A single reserve is even better - but getting that requires the main to either slide past the reserve, slider, bridle, bag and all, or it requires the student to force a downplane - and if he freezes after he forces the downplane he's dead.

So do you have him keep something that will likely land someone safely, or go with the option that has a better chance of landing him safely - but also a slight chance of creating a nonsurvivable problem? There are pluses and minuses on both sides of the issue. I think that keeping the biplane makes more sense, but that's just me.


Mickochet  (D 26656)

Feb 10, 2012, 11:58 AM
Post #55 of 57 (388 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

I have landed a side by side before (PLF) My main was a 99 FX and my reserve was a Swift Plus 145. THey actually did not do that badly. I left the toggle stowed and steared with the rear riser and did not flare. Got up and did a Tandem.


Mickochet  (D 26656)

Feb 10, 2012, 12:06 PM
Post #56 of 57 (388 views)
Shortcut
Re: [tkhayes] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

During my first few months of jumping I went to a new DZ near where my mother was living. She came out to the DZ to see me jump, she had never seen me jump before. A jumper had 2 out while she was watching and as he cut his main away it tangled with his reserve. He lived for about 1/2 hour after he landed. His wife and kids were there as well. So cutting the main away is not always the answer.


peek  (D 8884)

Feb 10, 2012, 1:15 PM
Post #57 of 57 (379 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mickochet] Flying a Biplane or side by side [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
A jumper had 2 out while she was watching and as he cut his main away it tangled with his reserve.

This is some good data you are adding to the discussion, (along with your post above about successfully landing a side-by-side with canopies that were very dissimilar.) Do you know what configuration the canopies were in right before the cutaway on the guy with the entanglement?



Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)