Forums: Skydiving: Gear and Rigging:
PD 143R really size

 


huszcza  (D 12111)

Oct 4, 2004, 8:33 AM
Post #1 of 14 (2030 views)
Shortcut
PD 143R really size Can't Post

hi there,

what is the really size of PD 143 reserve?. In my opinion it's a little bit bigger (ca 10%).
Who can help?

blue skies
jacek


Canuck

Oct 4, 2004, 9:13 AM
Post #2 of 14 (1965 views)
Shortcut
Re: [huszcza] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

151 sq. ft. according to the PIA.

Canauck


diablopilot  (D License)

Oct 4, 2004, 9:34 AM
Post #3 of 14 (1950 views)
Shortcut
Re: [huszcza] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

It's 143 square ft. Don't fool yourself into thinking it's bigger than that, just so you can jump a size smaller than you should.


councilman24  (D 8631)

Oct 4, 2004, 10:17 AM
Post #4 of 14 (1919 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

By the way PD measures it's 143. By the way PIA recommends measuring it's bigger. So when your comparing sizes between PD and other manufacturers your not comparing numbers obtained in the same way. This is why PD reserves seem to pack bigger.


diablopilot  (D License)

Oct 4, 2004, 10:36 AM
Post #5 of 14 (1908 views)
Shortcut
Re: [councilman24] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

I am aware of that, and it's quite disturbing that manufacturers can't get together and use the established standards of the association they are members of.

The point I'm trying to make, and the problem I've delt with in gear sales for a long time is that people see things like the words "flys big" and hear about measuring differences and make decisions about sizing that they might not have made before. This problem extends much furthur than PD's measuring system, but it's a problem.


sdctlc  (D 16437)

Oct 4, 2004, 11:49 AM
Post #6 of 14 (1879 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Canuck] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

Here is a size chart

Scott C.


(This post was edited by sdctlc on Oct 4, 2004, 11:50 AM)
Attachments: canopy size chart.pdf (34.0 KB)


MarkM  (C 35089)

Oct 4, 2004, 12:03 PM
Post #7 of 14 (1870 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sdctlc] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

On that chart, is there any reason why a Triathlon 175 has a 382 cu in volume while a Triathlon 160 has a 419?


sdctlc  (D 16437)

Oct 4, 2004, 12:07 PM
Post #8 of 14 (1868 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MarkM] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
On that chart, is there any reason why a Triathlon 175 has a 382 cu in volume while a Triathlon 160 has a 419?

Probably a great question. I did not put it topgether but it just flat out might be a mistake.. Parta-Gear does note this at the bottom:

CAUTION: PARA-GEAR has no control over these statistics. For general comparison only. Volume and size figures could vary 20% . This volume chart has been put together from many sources using various methods of measurements. Figures in lighter type furnished by PARACHUTE INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION. Figures in bold type come from many sources. THESE STATISTICS, THEREFORE, SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ONLY TO BE APPROXIMATE VOLUMES. Special thanks to Sandy Reid.


councilman24  (D 8631)

Oct 4, 2004, 1:29 PM
Post #9 of 14 (1846 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MarkM] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

A large 160 could easily be bigger than a small 175. And depending on who did the measurment and where the volume can vary with the same canopy. There is larger variation in volume measurement than area measuement.


inextremis  (D 6498)

Oct 4, 2004, 3:48 PM
Post #10 of 14 (1808 views)
Shortcut
Re: [councilman24] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

Could be that the mistake is that the larger canopy actually had dacron lines (like a hybrid), but is listed with microline. Blue skies


jrcrackers  (D 26874)

Oct 4, 2004, 4:22 PM
Post #11 of 14 (1799 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MarkM] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

depending on when it was made the difference in material is substantial. we have a jumper that has a tri 160 that packs much bigger than other tri 175. most packers run when we see him coming.


kelpdiver  (B 7)

Oct 4, 2004, 5:26 PM
Post #12 of 14 (1782 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MarkM] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
On that chart, is there any reason why a Triathlon 175 has a 382 cu in volume while a Triathlon 160 has a 419?

I also saw in that chart that the Triathlon 160 "measured" as a 168, while the 175 is a 175.

The 220 (which I've jumped before) is a 239! That might explain why the Spectre seems so much quicker to me. Is this figure valid? Anyone know what a Tri 210 is, then?


cruzlite  (A 44192)

Oct 5, 2004, 12:48 AM
Post #13 of 14 (1746 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MarkM] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

"On that chart, is there any reason why a Triathlon 175 has a 382 cu in volume while a Triathlon 160 has a 419? "

The 160 numbers are PIA...
The 175 numbers are from a diferent source..mfr?
( Numbers in bold type )

My experience has been that the PIA numbers are
closer to container mfr. numbers.

I also, would like to see some numbers on the TRI 210...

D


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Oct 5, 2004, 8:30 AM
Post #14 of 14 (1677 views)
Shortcut
Re: [cruzlite] PD 143R really size [In reply to] Can't Post

My experience has been that the PIA numbers are
closer to container mfr. numbers.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I only trust numbers published by container manufacturers, because they are the ones who get stuck with re-building a container if the canopies don't fit.
For example, back in the mid-1990s, Gelvenor (South Africa) made a batch of ZP fabric that weighed 20% more than American or British-made fabric. This resulted in a batch of Triathlons that packed considerably bulkier than earlier Triathlons. It drove container manufacturers to drink until they figured out the source of the problem.



Forums : Skydiving : Gear and Rigging

 


Search for (options)