Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
Crossbraced tandem canopy?

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

phoenixlpr  (D 3049)

Sep 18, 2006, 5:36 AM
Post #1 of 120 (6263 views)
Shortcut
Crossbraced tandem canopy? Can't Post

I got this picture and that said to be a FX 285 tandem prototype.

Why is that better than a non-crossbraced?
Why is that would be better to the tandem student/passenger?
Attachments: Picture077b.jpg (63.2 KB)


diablopilot  (D License)

Sep 18, 2006, 5:58 AM
Post #2 of 120 (6201 views)
Shortcut
Re: [phoenixlpr] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

Handles higher loadings better.

More stable in turblent conditions.

More swoop.Smile


quinny  (C 3101)

Sep 18, 2006, 6:02 AM
Post #3 of 120 (6195 views)
Shortcut
Re: [phoenixlpr] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

I come haulin ass in on a set 360!
A crossed braced 285...hmmmm....AWESOME!!!
A great way to introduce students to skydiving
and POND SWOOPING on their first jump!
Cool
They are probably going on the basis that a crossed brace
is a nice rigid and stable wing???
I love it!!!Laugh


jdfreefly  (D 24037)

Sep 18, 2006, 6:12 AM
Post #4 of 120 (6176 views)
Shortcut
Re: [phoenixlpr] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

Only a matter of time until we start having tandem pond swoop competitions.

Put an expeienced guy on the fron flying the toggles, guy on the back works the risers!


nicknitro71  (D 26704)

Sep 18, 2006, 6:35 AM
Post #5 of 120 (6153 views)
Shortcut
Re: [phoenixlpr] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

I want one!!!

Make mine with dacron lines, just in case...


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Sep 18, 2006, 6:46 AM
Post #6 of 120 (6145 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nicknitro71] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't, first time a student drops thier feet in an attempt to stand up early, it will be a bad day for us both.

Why is this being developed? I just don't see a practicle purpose for it, but I am new to tandems with only 1000 in the last 7 years.


phoenixlpr  (D 3049)

Sep 18, 2006, 6:52 AM
Post #7 of 120 (6141 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

It so is nice to share my point of view with someone so new to tandems. WinkPirate


quinny  (C 3101)

Sep 18, 2006, 8:11 AM
Post #8 of 120 (6082 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nicknitro71] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

Oooh and RDS!!!Wink


piisfish

Sep 18, 2006, 8:35 AM
Post #9 of 120 (6057 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quinny] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Oooh and RDS!!!Wink
Well at least the slider was pulled down Tongue


OnYourBack  (D 25190)

Sep 18, 2006, 8:44 AM
Post #10 of 120 (6049 views)
Shortcut
Re: [piisfish] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm all about a more stable wing. A 285 though. Its only a matter of time before the tandem hook turn fatalities start coming in.Unsure


dharma1976  (D 28634)

Sep 18, 2006, 9:04 AM
Post #11 of 120 (6031 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jdfreefly] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Only a matter of time until we start having tandem pond swoop competitions.

Put an expeienced guy on the fron flying the toggles, guy on the back works the risers!

that has actually been done...check the pond swoping footage from the ranch circa 1996 I think you will see a tandem pond swoop

Cheers

Dave


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Sep 18, 2006, 9:12 AM
Post #12 of 120 (6020 views)
Shortcut
Re: [phoenixlpr] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

A tandem on mini-risers? Looks a lot smaller than 285 sq ft to me. Photo shop?

Derek


DZJ  (A 104861)

Sep 18, 2006, 9:33 AM
Post #13 of 120 (6005 views)
Shortcut
Re: Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

What's the 'Daedalus Project' (as written on the canopy)? Some subdivision of Icarus?


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Sep 18, 2006, 9:43 AM
Post #14 of 120 (5999 views)
Shortcut
Re: [matthewcline] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I don't, first time a student drops their feet in an attempt to stand up early, it will be a bad day for us both.

Why is this being developed? I just don't see a particular purpose for it, but I am new to tandems with only 1000 in the last 7 years.

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

I agree with matthewcline.
A 285 might work for tandems in a place - like Guam - with consistently strong winds and tiny Japanese students.
However, I worry about no-wind days, when a student digs a heal in to try and stop the slide.

2,000 tandems ago, a student did that with me, we just roared over her ankle, breaking it!
One broken student is enough for me!

Been there,
done that,
got that T-shirt,
learned my lesson - the hard way!


dragon2  (D 101989)

Sep 18, 2006, 12:02 PM
Post #15 of 120 (5928 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dharma1976] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Only a matter of time until we start having tandem pond swoop competitions.

Put an expeienced guy on the fron flying the toggles, guy on the back works the risers!

that has actually been done...check the pond swoping footage from the ranch circa 1996 I think you will see a tandem pond swoop

Cheers

Dave

Also a tandem swoop in here:
http://www.12000ft.com/video/23.html

The TM swooped his tandemchute better than he did his vengeance Laugh I think he scored 38mtr.


Fast  (D 28237)

Sep 18, 2006, 12:09 PM
Post #16 of 120 (5914 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Hooknswoop] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
A tandem on mini-risers? Looks a lot smaller than 285 sq ft to me. Photo shop?

Derek

I agree I think on the photoshop call. I created a photo comparing the two. The white Canopy is my XF2-139 taken with a Rebel XT and 15mm sigma.

I tried to size my photo to get the risers sizes close.

No way thats as big as claimed. Also, the girl very much looks photoshopped in.

Not to mention the picture looks in the final stages of a hook turn.
Attachments: Skydive-030.jpg (52.1 KB)


Chris-Ottawa  (A License)

Sep 18, 2006, 2:15 PM
Post #17 of 120 (5838 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Fast] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree it looks photoshopped. If you zoom in around the people, they are blurry. This is a good job though if it is truly photoshopped. ANotherthing to notice is that the TI's shoulders are above the 3 rings, outside the harness. I also don't see a harness for the student, but it could be just out of frame.

Another thing to question is the agressive turn that low on a tandem, can anyone say Cypres??

ANother is the fact that the harness connection points are non existant. From what I see around the DZ, they connect just below the 3 rings and I don't see them on the photo.

My vote is for photoshop


DJL  (D License)

Sep 18, 2006, 2:20 PM
Post #18 of 120 (5831 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Chris-Ottawa, Fast ] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

Wow, you guys are like...CSI-dz.com or something.Wink


matthewcline  (D 21585)

Sep 18, 2006, 2:27 PM
Post #19 of 120 (5821 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Chris-Ottawa] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

Regular risers look small under large canopies.
285 is big enough to make the look happen.
The T-I is holding 2 sets of toggles in his left hand and he is 10+ stories up buy the look of the constrcution in the back ground.

But I still am not a fan of a "swoop" canopy being used for tandems.


airtwardo  (D License)

Sep 18, 2006, 3:45 PM
Post #20 of 120 (5779 views)
Shortcut
Re: [quinny] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I come haulin ass in on a set 360!
A crossed braced 285...hmmmm....AWESOME!!!
A great way to introduce students to skydiving
and POND SWOOPING on their first jump!
Cool
They are probably going on the basis that a crossed brace
is a nice rigid and stable wing???
I love it!!!Laugh


NICE rigid and stable wing...Cool

Remember that the FIRST Cross-Braced Canopies were PD Excaliburs in what, the late 80's...?

I had at least one in almost every size they made, went through 3-4 of the 260 sqft ones over the course of 10 years of Pro Demo jumping.
See this... Wink



I'm 240 pounds without gear, and add another 100 plus pounds of misc. gear, flags, banners, pyro...and the 260 was loaded about the same as a tandem 285 would be.

Those 260's were the best demonstration canopies I've ever found, IMHO.
Enough speed to get ya back, and the stability to sink in and stand up even loaded over 1:1...IN A STADIUM!Wink

All the Excalibur's were, was a cross braced 9 cell, it flew, opened and packed like a big 9 cell canopy except it was STRONGER and didn't buffet much in deep brakes because the airfoil was somewhat more ridged.

And as far as 'size'...I'd love to see a cross braced 285, many of the first tandem canopies were f-111 325's...Crazy


Just because it's 'cross braced' doesn't mean it's a swooper only platform!Laugh


teason  (D 18902)

Sep 18, 2006, 6:33 PM
Post #21 of 120 (5720 views)
Shortcut
Re: [phoenixlpr] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

If you look at the TM's left 3 ring (bottom right of the photo) you'll see the hook from the student harness.

If you are wondering why manufacturers are moving toward eliptical, smaller canopies, here's some food for thought.

We have several tandem canopies on our DZ, most are rectangular but some are eliptical. The rectangular planform has a very high toggle pressure when manoevering. After a day of doing 8 or more tandems, my arms really start to ache. With the ellipticals, the toggle pressure is very light allowing for lots of strength reserves for the flare.

Also with smaller tandem canopies (we have a 396 and a 350 Firebolt) the flare is easier to achieve. For a shorter TM, a smaller canopy will have a shorter stroke to the flare. With my long arms, I just scratch the bottom end on the 396. If I had shorter arms, a 350 would be a must.

A friend of mine took a 230lbs student with his 298 Firebolt. At his height, I don't believe that the landing would have been as good with a 396.

I don't think that smaller tandem canopies are there for ground hungry front riser swoops with students, there are being designed with lighter toggle pressure and more usable control range in mind. And that's not to mention how easy it is on the packers. The difference between packing a 396 vs. a 350 is night and day.


packing_jarrett  (D License)

Sep 18, 2006, 8:23 PM
Post #22 of 120 (5688 views)
Shortcut
Re: [teason] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
And that's not to mention how easy it is on the packers. The difference between packing a 396 vs. a 350 is night and day.
In reply to:

I'd rather pack a set 400 than that 280 x-brace. I like how jumpshack makes a 298 hybrid. That would be really easy to pack.


mattaman  (D 20957)

Sep 18, 2006, 10:01 PM
Post #23 of 120 (5647 views)
Shortcut
Re: [phoenixlpr] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

Pink elephants. Its a good idea only for very experienced instructors with a great skill level for both flying and malfunctions, the pink elephant will be the loading on the risers when they have their first spinning malfunction, its killed many people who couldn't cut away, then you have the rsl, don't where it on tandems myself, I won't, I've had 23 mals, 15 of those tandem mals, and man alive, you can come off spinning and tumbling on a violent one, I've had the reserve pilot chute hit my foot before I made the choice to not use the rsl, I want to be stable before deploying the reserve. High performance canopies mean high performance mals, there opening up an area of liability, we already have enough of these out there


diablopilot  (D License)

Sep 18, 2006, 11:30 PM
Post #24 of 120 (5623 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Hooknswoop] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
A tandem on mini-risers? Looks a lot smaller than 285 sq ft to me. Photo shop?

Derek

No photoshop.


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Sep 19, 2006, 12:58 AM
Post #25 of 120 (5595 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Chris-Ottawa] Crossbraced tandem canopy? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Another thing to question is the agressive turn that low on a tandem, can anyone say Cypres??

A vertical speed of 78 mph might be a little tough to do with any canopy as big as 285 sq. ft. Can you say drag?


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)