Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
Landing skills...

 


AndyMan  (D 25698)

Mar 5, 2001, 6:06 PM
Post #1 of 19 (3866 views)
Shortcut
Landing skills... Can't Post

Lisa sez:
In reply to:
parachute lisa fallingdown
This reminded me of a topic that went by on the old DZ.com - Someone suggested that women have a harder time landing then men because women are somehow not as good at judging distances as men are, or something like that.

I was at the Paraquip "skydivers unite for safety" this last weekend at Skydive Chicago. John LeBlanc of PD was giving a symposium called "wing loading and its effects". He pointed out something that in hindsight is obvious, but until then I hadn't thought of it in these terms.

The performance of a given canopy is determined by:

1) design. Eliptical or not.
2) wing loading. 1.0 or 4.5
3) line length.

1 and 2 or obvious, but 3 is something I've always overlooked. The idea is that whenever you turn, the canopy has to physically move the jumper out to the side in order to create the proper angle of attack required for a turn. The same is true with flaring, Changing the angle of attack requires the jumper to move out infront of the canopy.

Here's the problem - longer lines mean that the canopy is required to move the jumper a greater distance to accomplish the same turn. This results in larger canopies having kludgier performance then a smaller canopy of the same design, at the same wingloading. Even at the same wing-loading, smaller canopies will be much zipper.

Women tend to be lighter then men. If the DZ only considers wing-loading when handing out student gear, then it makes sense that women will suffer. Women will be jumping zipper, or higher performing mains then the men.

If it is true that at any given dropzone the women are having more trouble landing, I think it makes sense that this would be caused by a difference in line lengths.

Thoughts?

_Am



grasshopper  (D License)

Mar 5, 2001, 7:05 PM
Post #2 of 19 (3836 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills... [In reply to] Can't Post

nice theory, but I don't think it holds up. first off, that seems to apply to turns, not how the canopy flares. second, few women I know jump anything smaller than a 120. A lot of guys do jump smaller canopies and don't have a problem. I jump a 120 at 1.6:1 and have no real problems with it. yes, it does turn well, but it lands easier thana 150.

chicks can't land



Premier skybytch  (D License)

Mar 5, 2001, 9:45 PM
Post #3 of 19 (3824 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills... [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
chicks can't land
Much as I hate to admit it, grasshopper is right! The majority of female jumpers can't land for shit. This is why I think new female jumpers should be encouraged to buy canopies that they will load below 1.0:1. Keep 'em in the sport longer if they have a canopy that they can safely land.

I like the theory that men have better depth perception than we do. Not sure that line length would have that much to do with it, but then I don't know much about canopy design.

pull and flare,
lisa


bwilling  (C 13618)

Mar 6, 2001, 7:31 AM
Post #4 of 19 (3799 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills... [In reply to] Can't Post

I think the low wing loading idea is a good one... I watched Freaksis land her Hornet (loaded about 1:1) this weekend, and she still had lots of drive on landing, and got herself a nice, soft, standup - under great pressure I might add, 'cause it was really muddy...Smile you could have pond swooped on half the airport!



Dutchboy  (A 37004)

Mar 6, 2001, 9:33 AM
Post #5 of 19 (3784 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills... [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Poster: bwilling
Subject: Re: Landing skills...

I think the low wing loading idea is a good one... I watched Freaksis land her Hornet (loaded about 1:1) this weekend, and she still had lots of
drive on landing, and got herself a nice, soft, standup - under great pressure I might add, 'cause it was really muddy... you could have pond
swooped on half the airport!
Not to take anything away from sis, but the Hornet is a great canopy. Forgiving, but also a bit fun if you load it over 1.2. I love mine, even after 50+ jumps I have on it.



Cacophony  (D 23912)

Mar 6, 2001, 12:44 PM
Post #6 of 19 (3767 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills©©© [In reply to] Can't Post

AndyMan is right about what he is saying, but I don't think you could say that that is why most female skydivers suck at landing© I guess girls just suck at landings at your DZ or they just suck period© Sorry girls©

Safe landings,
Alex C-30872


tigra  (C 27417)

Mar 6, 2001, 1:46 PM
Post #7 of 19 (3757 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills©©© [In reply to] Can't Post

You're just trying to start trouble!



Cacophony  (D 23912)

Mar 6, 2001, 3:55 PM
Post #8 of 19 (3737 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills©©© [In reply to] Can't Post

Sorry©

Safe landings,
Alex C-30872


freaksister  (B 25147)

Mar 6, 2001, 8:09 PM
Post #9 of 19 (3715 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills©©© [In reply to] Can't Post

hmm...i don't seem to have problems with landings...what's the deal? i mean that is a generalized statement. forgive me, but being in psychology i tend to respect actual numbers obtained in valid studies not just a few observations here and there. the only women i have met with landing problems were having trouble flaring because they were on giant student canopies and didn't have much arm strength. i never had either of those problems b/c the largest student canopy i ever jumped was a 210, and i have good upper arm strength to boot. however, i have talked to some girls who didn't have much upper arm strength and struggled to flare, while the JMs were misunderstanding what was happening. anyway, my point is there is no proof of any sort that women have a harder time landing than men. men may have better depth perception than women but not in ALL cases. be careful what you generalize! Smile

a.



Craig

Mar 6, 2001, 8:33 PM
Post #10 of 19 (3712 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills©©© [In reply to] Can't Post

Also not to be overlooked is the age and jumps on a canopy. The canopies that students usually use have a signifigant amount of jumps. Take in to consideration also that F-111 fabric degrades in performance quicker, and this is generally what students start out on. This could very well account for landing problems. Some jumpers, male or female, may also have problems when they transition over to ZP since they may have to un-learn the techniques they used to use.

Craig

Craig



Premier skybytch  (D License)

Mar 7, 2001, 6:57 AM
Post #11 of 19 (3689 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills©©© [In reply to] Can't Post

Gotta disagree with ya sis! When I say we can't land as well as men I'm talking from watching women with hundreds or even thousands of jumps biffing their landings on a regular basis (and my own experiences rolling through the dirt too...). As an example, during the womens world record attempts at Perris a couple of years ago I'd estimate that nearly one third of the jumpers on each dive landed other than on their feet. Not saying that EVERY woman can't land, just that it seems to me that a lot of us stand up our landings less often than the average guy with the same number of jumps.

Anyway, I say let 'em laugh at us as we PLF our way through our skydiving day; we can still kick their asses in freefall! Wink

pull and flare,
lisa


tigra  (C 27417)

Mar 7, 2001, 7:41 AM
Post #12 of 19 (3680 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills©©© [In reply to] Can't Post

I really did not want to jump into this, because I am a "chick" and I have had a hard time with my landings in the past. When I was a student, it took me much longer to get it than most of my male friends. When everything had finally started to click, I made a dumb mistake and broke my ankle. Since then, I am always very careful to the point of being chicken. When in doubt, I tend to pick up my feet and slide. I've got the butt slide down to a science, and I'm pretty good at the old PLF as well!

But, yes, Lisa, we do kick ass in freefall, as a general rule. More relaxed, and better arches.



SpeedRacer  (B 26329)

Mar 7, 2001, 12:39 PM
Post #13 of 19 (3654 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills©©© [In reply to] Can't Post

I haven't really noticed the male vs. female difference in landings, but if it exists I don't think it has to do with women being given zippier student canopies. Student canopies are so huge & square that that shouldn't make too much of a difference.

However, I have noticed that a couple of women at our dropzone who are recently off of student status have gotten huge 200 sq ft canopies, (they probably weigh around 130 lbs) and they tend to float like a milkweed seed & backup in winds above 10 mph. this may lead to a lack of control.

I am as new as they are and I weigh 150 lbs, but my main is a used PD-170 w/ F-111 fabric. It's a rectangular, docile canopy and seems to be just the right size for me, not too big or too small ( I only have 42 jumps).


As for landing: I find that it helps if, just as I'm flaring, I look forward, and not down at my feet. If I stare straight down at the ground as I land, that's where I'm going to fall.
-Speed Racer





dove  (D 26128)

Mar 7, 2001, 7:04 PM
Post #14 of 19 (3628 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills... [In reply to] Can't Post

OK, this is getting out of hand. I agree with freaksis - prove it to me with a scientific study! I did all of my AFF on 230's (a wing loading of almost 2.0/1!!! I landed on my knees on the first jump and have been standing up my landings since then. Even with each downsize of my canopy and on all different sorts of rentals before getting my own gear, landing have not been a problem. You guys just spend too much time ogling us hot chicks and so you notice any less-than-graceful landings more than you would those of your brethren!

Cheers!
Elisa



Craig

Mar 7, 2001, 7:13 PM
Post #15 of 19 (3625 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills... [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
You guys just spend too much time ogling us hot
chicks and so you notice any less-than-graceful landings more than you would those of your brethren!

Cheers!
Elisa
Damn, their catching on!Tongue

Blues,
Craig



grasshopper  (D License)

Mar 7, 2001, 7:19 PM
Post #16 of 19 (3624 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills... [In reply to] Can't Post

dove, unless you weigh 460 lbs. you are confused. your wing loading was more like .5:1. and I might have been the one that initially said chicks can't land, but notice skybitch backed me up. She has hundreds of jumps, and hates to admit I'm right, but why would she agree with me??? ever notice there are no women entering swoop competitions, few women flying tri-cells, few women jumping anything under 97 sq. feet (even though they would still not be heavily loading it).



cam  (C License)

Mar 8, 2001, 2:50 AM
Post #17 of 19 (3605 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills... [In reply to] Can't Post

gotta jump in: like freaksis and others my first rx is to say show me the evidence. BUT then also show me that chickness has anything to do with it. i mean: IF numerically it seems that a greater percentage of female jumpers are fking up their landings, could this be caused by something that is only incidently related to being female? here are some ideas (of course, a whole bunch of different reasons needed to explain these, but): women may tend to be less current; women fly less aggresive canopies and push themselves less -- and improve skills less as a consequence; women do not have inherently worse depth perception than men but tend to use these skills less in other areas of their lives --- and so are worse...
btw: does anyone have a breakdown of landing fatalities by sex? (taking into account diff participation rates)...



Whiskeychick  (D 25123)

Mar 8, 2001, 2:46 PM
Post #18 of 19 (3569 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills... [In reply to] Can't Post

I find it rather interesting on just how many people believe that chicks can't land. When new male jumpers get their license and are looking to buy their first rig, most people will tell them to get a canopy that is loaded about 1:1. I weigh 105 (exit weight of 125), and even though I had been landing great under my gear rental at the time (sabre 170), a lot of people told me that I might really hurt myself under the sabre 135 that I was looking at buying, that I should get a 150 instead. These people would then tell the 170 lb male jumper with the same number of jumps and landing ability as me, to go ahead and buy a 170 sq ft canopy. These people really psyched me out and made me think I was making a bad decision. Luckily, my rigger and jumpmasters, who knew me the best, advised me to go ahead and get the 135. And I've been really happy with it, no wind, crosswind, downwind. At any rate, I realize that if you don't know someone personally, you are forced to make generalizations based on sex, jump numbers, age, etc. But that still doesn't mean that I can't find it a bit annoying at times.

-WC



freaksister  (B 25147)

Mar 8, 2001, 9:29 PM
Post #19 of 19 (3545 views)
Shortcut
Re: Landing skills... [In reply to] Can't Post

i will say that a lot of women don't get as aggressive with their canopies, etc...but that may change. i for one, want to learn to surf! :) i just might end up on the para-performance tour one day...you never know! hehe

but seriously folks, i guess it boils down to who cares,right?






Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)