Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL

 


EOCS  (C License)

Feb 29, 2012, 10:27 AM
Post #1 of 38 (2901 views)
Shortcut
Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL Can't Post

hi all,

got my harness and reserve used this last summer and after a quick inspection at the DZ and a ok by my instructors i bought it. the AAD had been removed but the reserve was strill in the freebag and there it sat until now. i will be getting my main next week and AAD and plan to go and and hook them up. I am doing some things to learn rigging like inspecting canopies with a rigger there and checking harnesses so i thought i would give this reserve a quick look over at home and to let it breathe a little before repack.

Now to the point.

the max exit weight on this is 153 pounds as stated on the tag
according to google translate i weigh about 178 pounds this would give me a WL of 1.25 and be almost 25 pounds over max.

Does anyone have recent experience with this reserve? is it common to overload reserves this much? is this max weight just to keep the WL at 1:1 although it can handle more?

I would not want this thing ripping in half just when i need it :S

i did a search and it mainly yielded older info that i could not post on.

I plan to run over this with the riggers and others at our DZ but that wont be tll next week so im here for opinions.

Thanks,
Jim

EDIT* otherwise the WL does not worry me and i was aware of it when i bought it :)


(This post was edited by EOCS on Feb 29, 2012, 10:31 AM)


Premier skybytch  (D License)

Feb 29, 2012, 11:08 AM
Post #2 of 38 (2858 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
is this max weight just to keep the WL at 1:1 although it can handle more?

Maybe it can handle more. Maybe not. Ravens were designed back in the 1980's, when no one loaded anything over 1.0. Even if it was built after most jumpers started flying zp mains, it's still ancient technology.

It probably won't blow up on you, but loaded over 1.0:1, the stall point is much higher up than it is on any modern reserve that was designed to be loaded over 1.0. MANY people who have flown Ravens loaded like yours would be have found themselves flat on their asses after flaring just like they do on their main. The unlucky ones ended up with broken wrists or tailbones or shattered vertebrae.

Nobody I know would recommend that reserve at that wingloading for any jumper, much less a novice.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Feb 29, 2012, 11:13 AM
Post #3 of 38 (2854 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

>Does anyone have recent experience with this reserve? is it common to overload
>reserves this much?

Microravens do not handle overloading well. I've seen half a dozen injuries up to and including broken femurs from people trying to land them "normally" (i.e. like a typical main.)

They CAN be landed safely at higher loadings, but you need to practice with them - you can't just expect to land them like you would a main parachute.

Overall I don't recommend them outside of special circumstances (i.e. for a water rig.)


DrewEckhardt  (D 28461)

Feb 29, 2012, 11:56 AM
Post #4 of 38 (2825 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skybytch] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
is this max weight just to keep the WL at 1:1 although it can handle more?

Maybe it can handle more. Maybe not. Ravens were designed back in the 1980's, when no one loaded anything over 1.0. Even if it was built after most jumpers started flying zp mains, it's still ancient technology.

It probably won't blow up on you

I saw a guy spin in under a reserve without span-wise reinforcing tapes across all the line attachments that had split in two and five cell chunks on deployment which were held together only by the single strong tape at the tail.

That was an AFF instructor knocked out by a student on deployment who left the video unconscious in a head-down position and presumably traveling fast when his CYPRES fired although I'd guess a premature deployment freeflying could do the same thing.

For classic accuracy or flat RW I would and do jump old designs at appropriate wing-loadings (the Raven-III in my accuracy rig is 250 square feet), but for freeflying I'll stick to something like the PDR, Smart, R-Max, etc. (even Tempos made after 2001 got span-wise tapes).


(This post was edited by DrewEckhardt on Feb 29, 2012, 11:58 AM)


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Feb 29, 2012, 2:19 PM
Post #5 of 38 (2764 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

The last time I discussed Micro-Ravens - with a Precision Aerodynamics factory rep - he admitted that "Ravens flare like %$#@! at 1.4 pounds per square foot!"

For a few years, the young jumpers in Pitt Meadows ignored me when I cautioned them about over-loading Ravens. THEN a young jumper made a series of mistakes - on his way to breaking bones - while landing a tiny Raven.
Sales of second-hand Micro-Ravens evaporated that summer ... and have never recovered.

By then, Precision had already stopped sewing Micro-Ravens and was pushing their (better) R-Max reserve. I have landed a tiny R-Max. I loaded it at the upper edge of the performance envelope. The flare was abrupt, but I landed softly in a muddy, farmer's field. Yes, I have far more respect for R-Max reserves, but would never buy an R-Max that small.

Bottom line, you would be better off with a more modern reserve, like a Precision R-Max, Performance Designs Reserve, PD Optimum, PISA Tempo, Aerodyne Smart, etc.


Premier skydiverek  (C 41769)

Feb 29, 2012, 2:23 PM
Post #6 of 38 (2760 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

Check these BRUTAL tests on "Speed 2000" reserve:

http://www.paratec.de/...-2000-Drop-Tests.mov

And it packs a bit smaller than Optimum!


CMiller  (B 30864)

Feb 29, 2012, 4:18 PM
Post #7 of 38 (2716 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

I would be as conservative as possible on a reserve. You need one when things don't go right. Typically you're going to deploy a reserve at a much lower altitude than your main. This means you may not make it back to the landing area; you are probably going to be landing out.

As others have said they don't handle high loading well. That, and landing out are factors that would make me not recommend this to you.


(This post was edited by CMiller on Feb 29, 2012, 4:20 PM)


stayhigh  (F 111)

Feb 29, 2012, 6:36 PM
Post #8 of 38 (2671 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

just don't flair anymore than chest level, you'll be fine.

wait until you get to the ground, and very short stab, and plf.


chuckakers  (D 10855)

Feb 29, 2012, 6:54 PM
Post #9 of 38 (2668 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
the max exit weight on this is 153 pounds as stated on the tag
according to google translate i weigh about 178 pounds this would give me a WL of 1.25 and be almost 25 pounds over max.

Why, why, WHY would you even ask? Would you overload an airplane? An elevator? A boat? A bungee cord? A zip line? A climbing rope?

No? Then why would you even consider over loading your last chance at survival while skydiving???? This perplexes me.

Your own statement should answer your questions for you. Over loading a reserve is sport death. I personally know someone who died when he blew a reserve to shreds due to overloading.

Manufacturers limits are there for a reason. Follow them - or face the consequences.


Premier wmw999  (D 6296)

Feb 29, 2012, 8:04 PM
Post #10 of 38 (2646 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stayhigh] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

Absolutely true. I have one that, when I'm heavily weighted, I load about the same.

I have over 2000 jumps, many of them on 1980's-era squares. Remembering to flare your reserve differently from your main is not particularly easy; you're focused on different things than the fact that the flare can hurt if you do it the same as your usual flare.

Get a different reserve.

Wendy P.


pchapman  (D 1014)

Feb 29, 2012, 8:41 PM
Post #11 of 38 (2626 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chuckakers] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
the max exit weight on this is 153 pounds as stated on the tag.

Why, why, WHY would you even ask? a reason. Follow them - or face the consequences.

Hang on here - that's going too far. We know some limits on skydiving gear are just ultra-conservative limits from the manufacturers that have little to do with actual use. And other limits are certification limits, which are very important to take heed of.

A newbie has to learn which is which.

For example, the maximum suspended weight for a PD126 in a 1993 advert is 151 lbs. That's laughable, just a conservative suggested number, that nobody realistically pays attention to, now or then. The real hard limit is the 254 lbs certification limit, while other lower loadings can be debated depending on jumper skills and other factors.

A newbie needs to learn the subtleties, and that's what this thread is about.

Part of that is that Microravens start to take significantly more skill to land as one loads them up, relative to a PD at the same wing loading.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Feb 29, 2012, 10:06 PM
Post #12 of 38 (2605 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chuckakers] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

>Why, why, WHY would you even ask? Would you overload an airplane? An elevator?

I've never read the placarded weight and then asked people their weight as they are getting in. (Have you?) Since elevators almost never fail due to overloading there's not much concern there.

There's a similar issue with parachutes. Freeflyers with AAD's regularly exceed deployment speed limits and are usually fine. Skydivers regularly exceed weight limits on mains and are usually fine. People extend this thinking to reserves.

Indeed, when I started skydiving it was normal to overload both reserves and mains. (If you didn't you'd have to load mains at 1:1 or less.) Nowadays manufacturers use more realistic numbers, which is good - but some people still think "geez, if a Sabre 1 150's maximum weight was 168lbs - nobody loads them that lightly! Those numbers sound unrealistic."

But in any case it's not a good idea to exceed manufacturer's recommendations - and that is especially true on the Micro Ravens.


skypuppy  (D 347)

Mar 1, 2012, 6:25 AM
Post #13 of 38 (2526 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

I had a reserve ride under a microraven 150 a few years == my body weight would probably have been 185-190, so exit weight would have been around 210. I had no problem with landing the reserve, mind you I had a couple thousand jumps, and it was a pretty windy day. I actually enjoyed the canopy flight on that jump - it's one of the few I remember well. Sold the reserve a couple years ago, but that had more to do with I lost the freebag on that jump and never paid to replace it, so the rig just sat in the basement.


EOCS  (C License)

Mar 1, 2012, 6:42 AM
Post #14 of 38 (2519 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chuckakers] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
the max exit weight on this is 153 pounds as stated on the tag
according to google translate i weigh about 178 pounds this would give me a WL of 1.25 and be almost 25 pounds over max.

Why, why, WHY would you even ask? Would you overload an airplane? An elevator? A boat? A bungee cord? A zip line? A climbing rope?

No? Then why would you even consider over loading your last chance at survival while skydiving???? This perplexes me.

Your own statement should answer your questions for you. Over loading a reserve is sport death. I personally know someone who died when he blew a reserve to shreds due to overloading.

Manufacturers limits are there for a reason. Follow them - or face the consequences.

Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing.. the max exit weight it that what is listed in large print, there is a do not exceed weight aswell and that is far above what i weigh. From checking pics vs PDs websites it seems they rate their max exit weight the same as their lowest recommended weight or student weight although the do not exceed on the right side of their chart is far higher.

If i was even near the do no exceed weight i would not think to jump it.

Its similar to this pic from classifieds where the max exit weight is 134 but then under is another advanced training weight that is higher.

http://www.dropzone.com/...1&view=Image;d=1


fcajump  (D 15598)

Mar 1, 2012, 7:38 AM
Post #15 of 38 (2502 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
the max exit weight on this is 153 pounds as stated on the tag
according to google translate i weigh about 178 pounds this would give me a WL of 1.25 and be almost 25 pounds over max.

Why, why, WHY would you even ask? Would you overload an airplane? An elevator? A boat? A bungee cord? A zip line? A climbing rope?

No? Then why would you even consider over loading your last chance at survival while skydiving???? This perplexes me.

Your own statement should answer your questions for you. Over loading a reserve is sport death. I personally know someone who died when he blew a reserve to shreds due to overloading.

Manufacturers limits are there for a reason. Follow them - or face the consequences.

Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing.. the max exit weight it that what is listed in large print, there is a do not exceed weight aswell and that is far above what i weigh. From checking pics vs PDs websites it seems they rate their max exit weight the same as their lowest recommended weight or student weight although the do not exceed on the right side of their chart is far higher.

If i was even near the do no exceed weight i would not think to jump it.

Its similar to this pic from classifieds where the max exit weight is 134 but then under is another advanced training weight that is higher.

http://www.dropzone.com/...1&view=Image;d=1

Legal limits do not necessarily represent smart/safe limits. It only shows that during testing, they were able to deploy without exploding.
Being able to land at that wing loading, with your skill level, in a unexpected area, having opened low, and maybe you've got the use of both arms, or maybe not (check the recent incident forum), maybe your concious or maybe not...
You asked for opinion, many folks with much more experience and with experience with this type of canopy have given you the benefit of their experience.

At this point, you can either heed their advice and get a larger canopy or decide that "you're better than the average bear." In which case, I wish you luck... we've heard more than one show that attitude before... and morned more than one of them.Frown

Were it me, I would go larger/more conservative for my reserve.

But then again... maybe you're just that lucky... Unimpressed

Just my $.02
JW


chuckakers  (D 10855)

Mar 1, 2012, 7:57 AM
Post #16 of 38 (2494 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
the max exit weight on this is 153 pounds as stated on the tag
according to google translate i weigh about 178 pounds this would give me a WL of 1.25 and be almost 25 pounds over max.

Why, why, WHY would you even ask? Would you overload an airplane? An elevator? A boat? A bungee cord? A zip line? A climbing rope?

No? Then why would you even consider over loading your last chance at survival while skydiving???? This perplexes me.

Your own statement should answer your questions for you. Over loading a reserve is sport death. I personally know someone who died when he blew a reserve to shreds due to overloading.

Manufacturers limits are there for a reason. Follow them - or face the consequences.

Just to make sure we are talking about the same thing.. the max exit weight it that what is listed in large print, there is a do not exceed weight aswell and that is far above what i weigh. From checking pics vs PDs websites it seems they rate their max exit weight the same as their lowest recommended weight or student weight although the do not exceed on the right side of their chart is far higher.

If i was even near the do no exceed weight i would not think to jump it.

Its similar to this pic from classifieds where the max exit weight is 134 but then under is another advanced training weight that is higher.

http://www.dropzone.com/...1&view=Image;d=1

My bad, sort of. I was replying thinking you were talking about absolute TSO limits as opposed to recommended limits for the flying and landing.

With that said, it is a really bad idea for young jumpers to push weight limit on a main or reserve canopy.


Pulse  (D 16387)

Mar 1, 2012, 11:38 PM
Post #17 of 38 (2381 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Hang on here - that's going too far. We know some limits on skydiving gear are just ultra-conservative limits from the manufacturers that have little to do with actual use. And other limits are certification limits, which are very important to take heed of.

A newbie has to learn which is which.
Whoa! Are saying that being conservative for a new jumper is going too far? Sweet Jesus!

A huge number of jumpers out there should be jumping something bigger than what they are. That also goes for reserves. The fact is that when it comes down to safety, there are many more reasons to stay bigger than smaller. Simple fact.

Now allow me to seemingly contradict myself. As for the Micro Raven. I have a 135 and have landed it once loaded at 1.5:1 and it was fine. Yes, it did stall a bit faster than I expected but very reasonable. Video of the landing can be seen here:

http://pulsevisuals.com/movies/malfunction.html

Granted I had around 5,000 jumps and quite a bit of experience on F111 7 cells. I also fly in such a way that if it stalls, it stalls 2 or 3 feet off the ground rather than ten feet. Many stall their mains 3 feet off the ground consistantly and just figure that's how their canopy lands.


jeepers  (A 738)

Mar 2, 2012, 5:05 AM
Post #18 of 38 (2344 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wmw999] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

You're supposed to flare your reserve differently? Can you elaborate please?


dragon2  (D 101989)

Mar 2, 2012, 5:12 AM
Post #19 of 38 (2343 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jeepers] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
You're supposed to flare your reserve differently? Can you elaborate please?

A reserve is a F111 7cell. They fly and flare differently from the ZP 9cells (and 7cells) we fly today as mains. The closest thing to landing a real reserve is landing a PD Lightning CRW canopy or if you can still find one a F111 canopy like a PD 7/9 cell, Cruislite or Raven.

A couple manufacturers offer demos. Try a demo reserve as a main. Preferably a demo the same size and model as you own or plan on buying.


phoenixlpr  (D 3049)

Mar 2, 2012, 7:31 AM
Post #20 of 38 (2321 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dragon2] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
You're supposed to flare your reserve differently? Can you elaborate please?

A reserve is a F111 7cell. They fly and flare differently from the ZP 9cells (and 7cells) we fly today as mains. The closest thing to landing a real reserve is landing a PD Lightning CRW canopy or if you can still find one a F111 canopy like a PD 7/9 cell, Cruislite or Raven.
Almost, but low porosity material has a porosity like ZP for a couple of jumps. I'd rather compare reserves to Triathlon(ZP) or Spectre.


dragon2  (D 101989)

Mar 2, 2012, 7:43 AM
Post #21 of 38 (2324 views)
Shortcut
Re: [phoenixlpr] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
You're supposed to flare your reserve differently? Can you elaborate please?

A reserve is a F111 7cell. They fly and flare differently from the ZP 9cells (and 7cells) we fly today as mains. The closest thing to landing a real reserve is landing a PD Lightning CRW canopy or if you can still find one a F111 canopy like a PD 7/9 cell, Cruislite or Raven.
Almost, but low porosity material has a porosity like ZP for a couple of jumps. I'd rather compare reserves to Triathlon(ZP) or Spectre.

I've done hundreds of jumps on both, and spectres/tris don't quite compare to reserves IMO. Yes better than a sabre 2 or stiletto, but coming straight off a spectre 150/spectre 135, a reserve still flared quite different.

After 50+ jumps on lightnings however, my next couple reserve landings felt remarkably similar Tongue Heck I did 10 jumps filming CRW using a demo PD126R, it fit right in with the lightnings.

Anyway, a reserve flies and lands radically different from modern 9cells, and flying one that is over the limit at a fairly high WL (=anything over 1.0-1.1) is a bad idea all round. If you are going to do it, better fly that reserve a couple times in non-emergency situations and see how you feel about it then. And remember that not every reserve ride goes 100% as planned. This coming from someone who broke her nose having to land a not fully opened 1.2 loaded reserve @ 350ish jumps.


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Mar 2, 2012, 9:18 AM
Post #22 of 38 (2303 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile Hi

Frown I wonder how your Instructor said it is fine for you ???? overloaded & 80 jumps ???

I'll make it short & clear: Do NOT use the MR150 - you are over the Mfg. Max weight limits & might risk yourself during the use.

Limits were created for a reason called Safety !!!

Does the 178 lb. is your body weight or your Exit weight ? the MR150 is limited to 153 lb. Max Exit Weight.

Be Safe & Think Twice !!!


(This post was edited by RIGGER on Mar 2, 2012, 9:30 AM)


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Mar 2, 2012, 9:33 AM
Post #23 of 38 (2294 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jeepers] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

>You're supposed to flare your reserve differently?

Depends GREATLY on the reserve. PD Optimums flare a lot like mains, but with less power overall and less flare deep in the stroke. PD reserves flare more like Triathalons - most of the flare is in the first half of the stroke. Microravens flare like that, but also stall hard once you get past the point at which you're getting a reasonable amount of flare.

All of which means - if you are going to load a reserve heavily, or are going to jump a reserve that flies significantly differently than what you are used to, it is a VERY good idea to put a jump or two on it to learn how to fly it. That way you can learn under ideal conditions instead of the worst of conditions (bad spot right after a low cutaway.)


Pulse  (D 16387)

Mar 2, 2012, 2:44 PM
Post #24 of 38 (2252 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jeepers] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
You're supposed to flare your reserve differently? Can you elaborate please?

It's kind of an interesting question. My answer falls into the 'no' and 'yes' catagory.

No - Because i approach flaring different parachutes with the same mentality. Slow, controlled flare. Increasing AoA but careful to not add too much and kill your energy. So mentally my flare on my raven 135 was no different than any other canopy I've ever jumped.

Yes - Keeping the above in mind. The flare probably does end up being a bit different. As many have posted, it does NOT flare like most people's mains these days. Worse yet, I think many hear about how 'badly' reserves flare and people end up messing it up because they change their mindset and do what they're told. Not paying attention to what the parachute is telling them to do.


Spills  (B 36648)

Mar 5, 2012, 8:24 PM
Post #25 of 38 (2141 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

I was recently reading a PD reserve paper and noticed that it was actually illegal to jump over the limit. Although I don't know when the FAA would be out enforcing this. Maybe if you are doing a demo.



"Many jumpers exceed the maximum weight limit
for their main canopies. While this may be foolish, it is not illegal. The maximum exit weight for a reserve is a legal limit. In the United States, it is a violation of federal law to jump a reserve if your exit weight exceeds this limit, and other countries may enforce this limit as well."


pchapman  (D 1014)

Mar 6, 2012, 10:58 AM
Post #26 of 38 (719 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Spills] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I was recently reading a PD reserve paper and noticed that it was actually illegal to jump over the limit.

I think that is still highly disputable -- because there are different kind of limits. "Maximum weight" ON ITS OWN seems to have no legal definition and no validity as a legal limit. For a Raven 150 there are two "maximum weights", 153 lbs or 254 lbs.

Companies have generally never tried to enforce those lower kind of maximum weights, in effect encouraging jumpers to exceed suggested values. PD in the 1990s may have tried to keep Stilettos out of the hands of newbies, but they sure didn't stop anyone weighing over 125 lbs without gear from buying a PD 126. (Max weight listed in that era was 151 lbs.)

For Precision, those low Maximum Exit Weights (such as 153 lbs for a Raven 150) are actually listed on the orange warning label, making it look like it is the true legal limit. But then the wording on the label mentions TSO C23c Cat B's 254 lbs and states that "to lower the risk of death, serious bodily injury, canopy damage & hard openings, never exceed the following limitations".. after which that low 153 lbs number is listed.

That confuses the issue -- It is certified to 254 lbs but the manufacturer wants you to load it lower. But is that a legal limit or not? "To lower the risk of death", you could also keep parachute gear in the closet and not jump.

Is anything a company says about the reserve's use binding on a user, other than the TSO'd limits? They can dictate how a rigger packs it, but can they dictate what a jumper does?

PD's Reserve Manual says:
Quote:
Exceeding the recommended maximum suspended weight
may result in serious injury or death due to landing injuries. Exceeding the absolute maximum
suspended weight is illegal, a violation of the Federal Aviation Regulations

Note the difference in terminology from the quote you found!

So there's a difference between RECOMMENDED and ABSOLUTE maximum weight. And nowhere is there an official definition for all manufacturers about maximum weight terminology. PD doesn't even use the exact same terminology from above, in the actual tables of reserves specs -- there one sees "max suspended weight" and "max suspended weight (TSO)".

In another PD document online (for PD reserve flight characteristics), there are again other words being used:
Both types of weight are listed as "maximum exit weight" but with categories like Student, Intermediate, Expert -- and then "Max." for the actual TSO weight, without saying TSO.

So that shows ever for one of the top companies that puts out the most detailed info for users, there is no standardization of terminology, probably to some degree because there are no official FAA or PIA terms in use.

Conclusion:
Unless someone can show that manufacturers' recommendations are legally binding on users (and I'm willing to learn about that), any statement of "maximum weight" is not legally binding unless it is the TSO'd weight.

(I'm not talking about what is smart or not, just what is legal.)


chuckakers  (D 10855)

Mar 6, 2012, 1:59 PM
Post #27 of 38 (702 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Companies have generally never tried to enforce those lower kind of maximum weights, in effect encouraging jumpers to exceed suggested values.

That my friends, is what you call "a leap".

Manufacturers placard their equipment with limits they have determined to be safe and/or maximums for TSO purposes. Enforcement of individuals who choose to exceed those limits would be impossible given the number of parachutes in use and the uncontrolled and undocumented nature of distribution among private owners.

Saying that manufacturers failing to attempt to enforce the impossible is the same as encouraging the behavior is absurd.


pchapman  (D 1014)

Mar 6, 2012, 2:20 PM
Post #28 of 38 (697 views)
Shortcut
Re: [chuckakers] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

Oh yeah, it would indeed be a case of trying to ENFORCE the impossible.

But it doesn't seem like they ever tried to even COMMUNICATE the issue.

Otherwise we should have heard companies say that loading a PD 126 over 151 lbs or a Raven 150 over 153 lbs was ILLEGAL.

We've had canopies like that for two decades and they've said nothing.

That's evidence that they don't believe it is ILLEGAL in FAA-land.


I'll grant you that some companies suck at communicating in general. I can't even find a Raven manual that hasn't been scanned from paper, and no R-Max manual seems to exist online.


chuckakers  (D 10855)

Mar 6, 2012, 2:33 PM
Post #29 of 38 (692 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Oh yeah, it would indeed be a case of trying to ENFORCE the impossible.

But it doesn't seem like they ever tried to even COMMUNICATE the issue.

Otherwise we should have heard companies say that loading a PD 126 over 151 lbs or a Raven 150 over 153 lbs was ILLEGAL.

We've had canopies like that for two decades and they've said nothing.

That's evidence that they don't believe it is ILLEGAL in FAA-land.


I'll grant you that some companies suck at communicating in general. I can't even find a Raven manual that hasn't been scanned from paper, and no R-Max manual seems to exist online.

They haven't said it's illegal because it's not. Stupid maybe, but not illegal.


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Mar 6, 2012, 8:47 PM
Post #30 of 38 (669 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

Manufacturers have to word limits very carefully to avoid law suits ... which makes some of their statements incomprehensible to anyone without a law degree.

Try reading the Canadian Air Regulations!
Hah!
Hah!


Premier skydiverek  (C 41769)

Aug 6, 2012, 7:14 AM
Post #31 of 38 (576 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydiverek] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Check these BRUTAL tests on "Speed 2000" reserve:

http://www.paratec.de/...-2000-Drop-Tests.mov

And it packs a bit smaller than Optimum!

More of test drops!:

http://vimeo.com/45599119


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Aug 11, 2012, 8:13 PM
Post #32 of 38 (476 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydiverek] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Check these BRUTAL tests on "Speed 2000" reserve:

http://www.paratec.de/...-2000-Drop-Tests.mov

And it packs a bit smaller than Optimum!

One problem, none of those tests would meet minimum TSO requirements. The airspeed must be at least 180 NEAS with a weight of at least 264 lbs. You cant substitute weight for airspeed like in some of the older TSOs.

Sparky


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Aug 11, 2012, 8:53 PM
Post #33 of 38 (465 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
EDIT* otherwise the WL does not worry me and i was aware of it when i bought it :)

At your experience level the wing loading should bother you. How many jumps do you have under a 7 cell made from lopo material?


phoenixlpr

Almost, but low porosity material has a porosity like ZP for a couple of jumps.

F-111 type material or lopo has a claimed cfm of 0-3 cfm. But in the real world it comes new at about 3-5+ cfm.

Sparky


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Aug 12, 2012, 1:20 PM
Post #34 of 38 (434 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Spills] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

"Legal" and "safe" are two separate concepts.

I was seriously injured while crash-landing an air plane with "legal" seat-belts.

"Safe" refers to improving your chances of walking away from a landing.

All parachute manufacturers over-test reserves much heavier and faster than they expect them to be loaded during normal skydiving.

Then they de-rate the weights and airspeeds to those most likely to survive opening shock.

Then they further de-rate canopy placards to improve the chances of your ankles surviving the landing.

Performance Designs has two reasons to for placarding reserves. Their first motivation is to keep your ankles intact and the second is to cover-their-asses "legally" if you hurt yourself operating outside of placarded limits.
As an aside, early Sabres (circa 1990) were placarded for only about 1:1 because back then, few skydivers knew how to flare canopies loaded more than 1:1.

Returning to the original poster: different generations of reserves tolerate over-loading to different degrees. If you load a Raven more than 1:1 you are "legally" exceeding placard limits AND you vastly reduce your "safety" (e.g. chances of walking away from a landing).


Decodiver  (D License)

Aug 12, 2012, 2:11 PM
Post #35 of 38 (425 views)
Shortcut
Re: [EOCS] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

Microravens are pieces of shit. Watched one of my packers auger in under a MR as he flared at shoulder level and it stalled. Sell it to your enemy it is a piece of shit.


Premier skybytch  (D License)

Aug 13, 2012, 7:35 AM
Post #36 of 38 (348 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Decodiver] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Microravens are pieces of shit.

When overloaded, yes indeed. They fly and land like crap. When loaded at or below 1.0, like they were designed to be, they are just fine.

Don't exceed the limitations of a piece of gear and it will perform as designed. Exceed the limitations and and you may have issues.

Or in other words, it's a poor craftsman who blames his tools. Sly


Andrewwhyte  (C 1988)

Aug 13, 2012, 8:45 AM
Post #37 of 38 (334 views)
Shortcut
Re: Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

I have landed a micro-Raven 150 loaded at ~1.25 a couple of times. Not great but certainly better than (for example) a Strong Master 425R within limits.


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Aug 14, 2012, 8:16 AM
Post #38 of 38 (257 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Decodiver] Microraven 150 @ 1.25 WL [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Microravens are pieces of shit. Watched one of my packers auger in under a MR as he flared at shoulder level and it stalled. Sell it to your enemy it is a piece of shit.

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

Hah!
Hah!
That reminds me of a youtube clip of an Israeli Defense Force soldier showing off PIAT. He should make training videos for Hezzbola!!!!
Hah!
Hah!



Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)