Jul 6, 2004, 9:37 PM
Post #1 of 24
(1229 views)
Shortcut
2 canopies out
Can't Post
what is everyone's experience or concept of a bi-plane (reserve in front -OR- reserve in back) or a side-by-side?
i always worry that i am not going to know what to do if i have this mal. other skydivers have told me: - don't do anything (but what about obstacle avoidance?)
- wait til the canopies separate and quickly cut the main away
- pull on risers to make a downplane (this worries me because i have no upper body strength)
- force it into a downplane by releasing the main's toggle (does this typically hold true? is it possible for the main to spin up around the reserve?)
Any theories, thoughts, or comments are very much appreciated [:) Perhaps this has already been answered & i missed it...
I've never actually dealt with this first hand, so I know better than to give advice, but I found this site really helpful: http://www.performancedesigns.com/docs/dualsq.pdf
Also, do a search on the forums, it's been discussed here lots!
Another thing to think about it is avoiding the situation entirely. Maintaining your gear, gear checks, and pulling at the proper altitude ( ie, don't flirt with cypress territory) should almost eliminate the two-out scenario.
Hollywood, I feel the same way as you. I feel like most people in that situation just play it by ear, but I would really like to have a plan in the event that it ever happened.
Kelly
billvon (D 16479)
Moderator
Jul 7, 2004, 9:10 AM
Post #8 of 24
(1072 views)
Shortcut
> don't do anything (but what about obstacle avoidance?)
If you are planning on landing a two-out, obstacle avoidance is less of a worry than landing a safe configuration. Use outside rear risers to point the canopies at somewhere safe and then stop messing with it. You will not have good control over your landing area; you will have to deal with not landing exactly where you want.
> wait til the canopies separate and quickly cut the main away
This may happen, it may not. Experience has shown that if you just leave them alone they won't separate.
>pull on risers to make a downplane (this worries me because i have no upper body strength)
If the canopies will not land you safely (i.e. they are spinning) this is worth a try, but make sure you are really clear before you cut away. Don't cut away if your reserve has deployed through your main lines, for example.
On Safety Day, 2003, a low-pull cypress-fire resulted in a stable bi-plane. It was my 111th jump.
170 spectre in front and a 170 tempo in back.
I opened above a place I couldn't land, so I had to steer it.
I used very gentle front/ main canopy toggle input as that is how I was instructed. I would turn a smidge then wait. The rear canopy would catch up and bump the main, then I would give it a little more input and wait.
It felt weird. Like driving in slush. Took a bit to get the hang of it. But it was actually very easy to carefully steer and land.
I slowly inched the canopies around to where I not only landed in the middle of a field, but into the light 0-10 mph wind. No flare. Stood it up. Softest landing I've ever had.
It wasn't difficult to do right. It never gave any indication of wanting to go into a side-by-side or downplane. (If you're going to have a 2 canopy out situation, 2 similarly sized 7 cells is the way to go. Not only are they sized about the same, they have the same line lengths as well).
I didn't really get scared until 45 minutes after I landed. It really rattled my cage. That next jump the following weekend was a hard one to do. Took a couple months before I felt 100% confident again. Took a hell of a lot longer than that before people stopped referring to me as "Mr. Safety Day".
AAD's are a good thing. The cheapest insurance you can get. Mine did nothing wrong. It did what it was designed to do. I was the one at fault.
Would I land a 2-out again? Maybe. If winds are light and my canopies seem to like each other, yes. No question.
If I had some altitude, and the winds were high, at 600 plus jumps, and my now mismatched canopies were fighting each other, I'd try to force a dp and cut.
The best thing though, is respect the sport and simply don't pull low. (Maintain alt awareness, learn a good track and you shouldn't ever have to).
(This post was edited by ZoneRat on Jul 7, 2004, 9:47 AM)
<<<If I had some altitude, and the winds were high, at 600 plus jumps, and my now mismatched canopies were fighting each other, I'd try to force a dp and cut.
>>>
Have you mentally rehursed this maneuver? Something like...left hand on reserve riser, right hand on cutaway handle. I don't think cutting away with a main steering toggle "in hand" would be cool.
PhreeZone (D License)
Moderator
Jul 7, 2004, 10:21 PM
Post #11 of 24
(970 views)
Shortcut
You don't have to. Its the same as going to a CRW downplane. Once the legs are locked and you are in the side by side once you nudge the canopies over they start to stabilize out facing down. That allows you to throw the toggles and do a clean breakaway.
MUAHAHAHA.... yes, i wish it was me in the picture.... it's Angelina Jolie.
i just hit 200 jumps & thought it'd be a good idea for a refresher on safety -- and thats what started the dialogue about 2 canopies out. and i jump @ Skydive Wayne County (Richmond, Indiana) and my social security # is 889-46-6561
- very good point though about simply maintaining your gear AND thanks for the website!
You don't have to. Its the same as going to a CRW downplane. Once the legs are locked and you are in the side by side once you nudge the canopies over they start to stabilize out facing down. That allows you to throw the toggles and do a clean breakaway.
So -- back to an original question -- by releasing a main toggle, will it (in most cases) go into a downplane? that's the impression i got from some skydivers debating this with me. Also, if the canopies DO start to separate, would you cutaway *with confidence* that the main risers would clear?
I've read this several times because it is the basis for USPA's recomendation of releasing the toggles on the front or dominant canopy and using them to steer with.
But this dualsq.pdf never says why they think releasing the toggles makes the situation better. They just say it is the preferred way.
----
Here's something I posted in another thread a couple years ago:
A few months ago I sat through the ground school part of an AFF certification course that Rick Horn gave here in Colorado, and I asked him about that.
Unstowing the brakes with both out seemed like a really bad idea - you are taking a touchy situation and making it even more touchy.
He said that shouldn't be in there, it was a mistaken copy and paste from some possible moves an experienced jumper might think about. (He also said the maximum performance turn one way and then the other on the A license proficiency card was another accidental copy and paste that shouldn't be there.)
I've never had two canopies out, well not since the 60's when I was experimenting with things, but, after talking to a number of experienced people, seeing a few two outs, and thinking about it, if I ever have one I plan to:
- If it's a biplane then steer really gently with the front canopy and try to get on the ground before anything weird happens (leave the brakes stowed and steer with the rear risers of the front canopy).
- If it's a down plane then chop the main.
- If it's a side by side then sweat bullets of indecision while I try some really gentle steering and see how it feels and then either land it or force a down plane and then chop the main or maybe something I haven't thought of yet.
----
Since then I have thought that if I had a side by side I would steer gently with the inside rear riser from each canopy.
This would tend to keep the canopies together whereas using outside risers would tend towards a downplane.
I don't think anyone ever wants to release just one toggle. That would be the equivalent of half-toggle input on the opposite toggle that you can't easily / intuitively stop, i.e. that is outside your control. Not good in any situation I can think of ever.
In reply to:
would you cutaway *with confidence* that the main risers would clear?
Nothing is ever guaranteed with our equipment, and lines and the like snag at their whim, not ours. That's why we think and wonder and debate emergency procedures like this so much - it's a gray area.
A few months ago I sat through the ground school part of an AFF certification course that Rick Horn gave here in Colorado, and I asked him about that.
Unstowing the brakes with both out seemed like a really bad idea - you are taking a touchy situation and making it even more touchy.
He said that shouldn't be in there,
That's the same thing I was taught in my FJC 4 years ago. IF it's a situation that your reserve fires after your main is open and toggles unstowed, then you would steer with those toggles. But if they're stowed, don't touch 'em. Steer with the risers.
>That's the same thing I was taught in my FJC 4 years ago. >IF it's a situation that your reserve fires after your main is >open and toggles unstowed, then you would steer with those >toggles. But if they're stowed, don't touch 'em. >Steer with the risers.
Maybe I'm interpreting it wrong or maybe they are not saying what they really mean but in
- for a biplane - "Steer the front canopy gently using toggles"
- for side by side (alternative 2) - "Steer the dominant (larger) canopy gently using toggles"
And in the pdf document at Performance Designs which these recommendations are based on it says the preferred method is to steer with the toggles of the dominant / larger / front canopy.
Maybe they are just assuming that if all toggles are stowed people would just naturally leave them stowed and steer with the rear risers.
But it sounds to me like they are saying to unstow the toggles and steer with them.
----
Every once in while in recent years I have a vision of me sitting in court trying to explain to a whuffo jury about something and finally losing it and cutting loose with
"I don't care what the fucking BSRs say! In this situation it's a stupid idea!"
That would at least renew my Crusty Old Curmudgeon rating. :-) :-)
----
Maybe the Safety and Training Committee could clarify this at the next BOD meeting.
I feel like most people in that situation just play it by ear, but I would really like to have a plan in the event that it ever happened.
Kelly
Kelly,
You can get some first hand experience with bi-planes, side-by-sides, and down downplanes if you'd like to try some CReW. Just come by Skydive Atlanta this weekend and let me know you're interested. I have some CReW canopies there.
But it sounds to me like they [USPA / the SIM] are saying to unstow the toggles and steer with them.
I agree that's what they're probably saying. I don't agree it's the best practice. (Yeah, I know, 200 jump wonder second-guessing the SIM. Well, I consider this particular part of the SIM only a recommendation, and would prefer to fly my two-outs with brakes stowed.)
PhreeZone (D License)
Moderator
Jul 9, 2004, 5:51 AM
Post #20 of 24
(853 views)
Shortcut
Kelly, take Chris up on his offer! You will learn so much about how canopies react when flying and bumping into each other on a CRW jump that it will give you confidence later. Going into a downplane and releaseing leg grips will show you how your canopies will react if you are in a solo downplane. Plus its just a lot of fun
Very insightful.... and thanks for the copy/paste from your previous post
SO -- you would use the "front" canopy to steer. Something i heard was to always use the dominant (in some cases, larger) canopy which is typically the main. Why use the front??
ON ANOTHER NOTE -- the thing about using a toggle to cause a downplane makes the situation even "touchier". So would you use a front riser? Rear? or anything to get the canopies to separate?
*sorry if i'm misunderstanding things or getting lines crossed* (ha! no pun intended) ~hollywood
>SO -- you would use the "front" canopy to steer. >Something i heard was to always use the dominant >(in some cases, larger) canopy which is typically >the main. Why use the front??
Remember that I've never had two out, so everything I'm saying is based on talking to some experienced people, seeing a few, and thinking ahead as much as I can.
Also, if you live close to the crewdog who invited you to give it a try, think about trying it.
Crewdogs appear to be a scruffy lot, with gear flaps open and risers hanging out and non standard attire and weird looking helmets and stuff, but (not to give away any trade secrets or anything) I think it is just part of the mystique, because when you show any interest they open right up and are nice people.
So .. in a biplane I would steer with the front canopy.
What would happen if I used the rear one? Would it become a side by side or ... ?
"Dominant" doesn't have a clear meaning to me.
In a biplane it seems like the front is dominant.
For a side by side is it the biggest one? or the one with the most drive? or ... ?
In a side by side I would start out trying the inside rear riser of both canopies.
As a general principle, if I had a stable situation, biplane or side by side, I would mess with it as little as possible and try to get on the ground before something weird happens.
>ON ANOTHER NOTE -- the thing about using a toggle >to cause a downplane makes the situation even "touchier". >So would you use a front riser? Rear? or anything to get >the canopies to separate?
Good question. You just uncovered something I haven't thought ahead about. I guess both front and rear would work. I'll have to ask a few people and think about it.
One thing that bugs me about using toggles is that, OK, maybe an experienced jumper can keep straight which risers are going to which canopy, but what about a student?
They're already rattled just jumping out of the plane. What if they undo one toggle from each canopy?
Now you've got two canopies doing what? Each going into line twists?
And suppose they do manage to cut away the main.
Now you've got a reserve with one toggle undone, doing what? Turning? Going into further line twists?
Is even an experienced jumper going to figure all that out??
So I'm going to stick with leaving my toggles stowed until some credible people convince me otherwise.
>*sorry if i'm misunderstanding things or getting >lines crossed* (ha! no pun intended)
Right ...
We've seen your type come through here before :-) :-)
So -- back to an original question -- by releasing a main toggle, will it (in most cases) go into a downplane? that's the impression i got from some skydivers debating this with me.
I asked John LeBlanc about 'inducing a downplane' from either a biplane or side-by-side configuration when he gave a talk about dual squares at a PIA Symposium some years ago. Many jumpers *think* it's easy to induce a downplane and have this as a 'plan'- after all CRW-dawgs do it all the time.
There are several differences between a personal downplane and what CRW-dawgs do.
1. You are mostly likely to be REALLY low - somewhere around 700 ft or lower when you realize you have two canopies out.
2. To induce a downplane you need to steer canopies in opposite directions. That takes two hands [*]. John told me that they tried this (My understanding was that both canopies had both brakes unstowed. The jumper had to pull down on the outside toggles or risers.) - up high of course. The canopies tended to come back together- so you needed to keep steering to keep them apart. Then with your third hand you'd cutaway the main when the canopies were far enough apart. Most of the jumpers I know only have two hands, some only have one.
Like, Skratch, I have never been under a personal two out situation. I've seen a number of them.
The only scenario where it *might* be feasible to induce a downplane, is one where the main and reserve are significantly different sizes. eg reserve ~150 sq. ft. and a main around 90 sq. ft. I know many jumpers that have this 'plan', but no one who has actually done it.
[*] Your comment of 'by releasing a main toggle' suggests another method of inducing a downplane. If you had a SBS, it may be possible to release only the inboard toggle of each canopy and get them to turn into a downplane. That would keep the canopies steering away from each other without the use of your hands. I do not know anyone that has tried this. I do not know if this would work. As far as I know PD has never tried this either. It may take several seconds for the canopies to separate far enough so that a snag after cutaway is minimal. If you are at 700 feet to begin with, then you have very little time to pull something like this off. Plus, as Skratch mentions, you have to figure out which risers go to which canopy. Color coded risers would help. Different colored toggles are what most people might have, but that's not universal. On top of all that, once you cutaway, your reserve will be in a turn.
BTW, your reserve should be a different color than your main. Oh yeah - at your next repack, after you do a simulated malfunction with cutaway, pull reserve, you should check to see which canopy is taller. This will come in handy if you do find yourself in a two-out situation. If the front canopy is taller so that the leading edge of the back canopy is below the trailing edge of the front canopy, you'll probably get a biplane. If the front canopy is shorter so that the leading edge of the back canopy is above or directly behind the trailing edge of the front canopy, you'll probably get a SBS. Most often the main is in front and the reserve is in back ( from common pull main as AAD fires scenario).
Biplanes are stable most of the time. I would do as little steering as possible. I would steer by lifting a leg (aka grab your opposite ankle with your hand). I would not do toggle or riser steering. I *might* release the toggles on the front canopy. If they were flying together fine I'd leave it alone. Any control inputs have to be small.
I do know one person that had a stable biplane. Then they got the get-home-i-tis bug and toggle steered the front canopy back to the DZ. The canopies downplaned ~150 ft - not pretty.
In reply to:
Also, if the canopies DO start to separate, would you cutaway *with confidence* that the main risers would clear?
My cutaway would be with confidence. But there are no guarantees about entanglements.
.
(This post was edited by MakeItHappen on Jul 11, 2004, 2:50 PM)
