0
skydived19006

Do skydivers care about safety? Bill Booth

Recommended Posts

This is also probably off-topic, but here goes:

What would be so bad about having mismatched main and reserve canopies in a two-out? In my line of thinking, it would give you a better chance of being able to cut away the main, since they would be flying at different speeds and wouldn't be in a biplane.

Would you end up with the smaller parachute under you, potentially falling inside it on cutaway?

Or is it the danger of a downplane? which you could cut away, but I guess is more dangerous if you don't.
__________________________________________________
I started skydiving for the money and the chicks. Oh, wait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic has been discussed over many a beer and I do not think there will ever be a consensus as to what is the correct thing to do. There are a lot of personal opinions and some hold more water than others. Most are not entirely wrong or entirely correct. You should weigh up all the factors and then base your decision on main and reserve choices. Do not only look at your reserve size, your mistake could possibly be in the choice of your main canopy size ( We never make the mistake in the choice of our main, right!) We at RWS do follow the general consensus published when PD did extensive testing on the two out situation (I am sure someone here can find the results of the test) There are other factors as well. A skydiver that is not comfortable jumping a small reserve should not jump a small main. The deciding factor here should be "can I land my main in a small or tight area". You have a much greater chance of landing your main of the DZ than your reserve. You use your main more often than your reserve therefore the law of averages state that you will land of more times on your main. In my skydiving career I can recall hundreds of jumps of the DZ on my main and not one on my reserve. I just did a quick poll in the office with some of jumping staff that are in today out of 46 000 jumps with 82 reserve rides. We had one off DZ landing on a reserve and 409+ off landings on a main canopy.
I want my reserve canopy to have (as close as possible) to have the same flight characteristics as my main. ZP or F-III is not that much of an issue. Most modern day F-III has zero or close to zero porosity, 0 to 3 cfm is the new standard that most canopy manufacturers adhere to. I do a lot of tandem training and the results I see are amazing. Jumpers with larger personal canopies are able to land closer to the target and better than hot shot canopy fliers who are used to flying smaller high performance canopies. We also have skyHook equipped demos one with a PD 106R and two with PD 176R and I see similar results, if a jumper jumps a small main he gets less than desirable results on the bigger reserve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

They still happen..You jump an AAD? You should never get knocked out, so why have one? Same reason.



I don't necesarily disagree, but still. Here's some thoughts.

Quote

1. Most don't know how a reserve flies, so they like the idea of having a bigger canopy to be safer. I have ~3600 jumps on mains. Of those ~1,300 are on 7cell F-111 canopies....How many do you have on 7cell F-111 canopies? Most people don't have many if even one. They do fly differently. I can land (and have) a Xbraced 69....I don't know a single person who would want to land a 69 reserve.



I have roughly 30 jumps on Raven and 300 jumps on a Triathlon. Granted that the Triathlon is ZP, but its permiability was probably a lot closer to a modern rarely used reserve than most "F111" canopies. People rarely jump reserves, but it's not too dificult to find canopies that fly a lot like a modern reserve.

Quote

2. There is a much greatter chance of landing off with a reserve than a main. Due to the simple fact that somethingw ent wrong...You ahve a much greater chance of landing off...People get killed landing the main they have jumped several maybe hundred times when landing off. They want a bigger canopy in case they have to land in an unfamiliar area.



It's certainly true that when we use our reserve we've very likely to land off. But the flipside of that is that for each time we land off, we're far more likely to be under our main than reserve. Yes people need to be able to land their reserve into a tight "off" location - but they need to be able to do that with their main, too. Far more people end up opening low with their main then they do with their reserve.

Quote

3. If you are under a reserve...That means shit happend. Most are going to be jazzed (My last mal was the first that didn't phaze me, no emotion at all...And I have 6). People who are excited make mistakes. They want a bigger canopy to minimize the chance they will get hurt.



People are also jazzed and excited when swooping their main, or landing downwind, or just completed a 300-way. Not to discount it, landing a reserve for my first time certainly gave me a buzz, but so did the first jump on my Stileto, or the last time I had a killer swoop. ( i think, that was a long time ago... )

Quote

4. You could be hurt or knocked out. Would you rather land a 113 or a 240 if you were not going to be able to flair?



Very true. Such events are rare, though.

While I'm sure there's some people who are being underconfident in picking their reserve canopies, I also think there's a lot of people who are being overconfident in ther main sizing.

Does somebody who jumps a 150 main REALLY need a 240 reserve? Probably not.

Should someone who needs a 240 reserve be jumping a 150 main? Probably not.

I think the real situation for most people lies somewhere inbetween those statements.

For the record, my second rig will have a 135 main with a 150 reserve. I doubt I'll ever go smaller than the 150 reserve for all the reasons above you've mentioned.

_Am
__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

So you think that your reserve sizing should be independant and separate to your choice of main...



Sort of, but not exactly.

First, I believe that when putting together a complete rig (assuming AAD), the very first thing to be chosen should be the reserve canopy. I don't understand why anyone would put an AAD on a reserve system that does not have a canopy large enough to land that person in a reasonably safe manner, downwind with brakes stowed.

The choice of main should come after the reserve is chosen. If the jumper chooses to jump a main that is much smaller than his reserve, then incompatibility in a two out situation is a consequence of the choice of main.

Accordingly, if a jumper is going to jump a main at such high wingloadings, then it behooves that jumper to avoid a two canopy out situation, even if that means pulling higher to ensure being in the saddle by AAD activation altitude. Of course, all jumpers should take care to make sure their kill line PCs are cocked.

I am aware that in a two canopy out situation, it is better to have two canopies of similar size. I do not think this justifies choosing a tiny reserve. If it the concern is that great, the jumper should consider a larger main to match an appropriately sized reserve.

For Great Deals on Gear


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I don't necesarily disagree, but still. Here's some thoughts



All very valid thoughts.
Some thoughts of mine:

Quote

I have roughly 30 jumps on Raven and 300 jumps on a Triathlon



Do you think you are the norm, or the exception? I know folks that have NEVER jumped an F111 7cell. Do you think that the fact you have those jumps might give you a different perspective?

Quote

It's certainly true that when we use our reserve we've very likely to land off. But the flipside of that is that for each time we land off, we're far more likely to be under our main than reserve. Yes people need to be able to land their reserve into a tight "off" location - but they need to be able to do that with their main, too. Far more people end up opening low with their main then they do with their reserve



I agree. But the real question is what does it hurt to have a bigger reserve?

Quote

While I'm sure there's some people who are being underconfident in picking their reserve canopies, I also think there's a lot of people who are being overconfident in ther main sizing.



I agree 100%

But the question is this....What harm doe it do if a guy wants a bigger reserve than his main? Is it dangerous for a guy to jump a big reserve?
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I’ve jumped a very wide verity of canopies over the years, my main right now is a Crossfire 159 and I can shoot good accuracy with it. I jumped a newly hooked up PD 280 in one of my student rigs the other day; I flew it down like an accuracy jumper and landed dead center! I also land tandems consistently very close to target in all kinds of wind conditions, loaded lightly to heavy. All of this still doesn’t change the fact that I would like to have the option to load my main to 1.5 and my reserve to 1.1.

Back to the original topic, I just thought it very ironic that Bill Wells is preaching how skydivers will choose style over safety, as in “I want a small reserve so I can have a really cool and small container”. The paradox is that RWS can not readily provide for someone who would rather be somewhat conservative with their choice of reserve.

BTW, anyone want to trade a PD218R (I have the 218), for a PD193R?

One more reason for my choice of reserve is that I have the damn thing! I don’t know, maybe I don’t really “need” a new container after all?

I'd still be interested in hearing what Bill has to say, guess he's out of town or something.

Martin
Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Martin... Bill Booth is on a trip in Europe and is in Italy currently. Communication is limited and if he was to be looking at the site I am sure he would supply a response.
As for the canopy combination you are asking for - this is simply not a normal canopy combination setup! The fact that various other manufacturers are prepared to build a one of a kind is generous, but containers do not just scale in CAD at will... in theory yeah it all sounds great, but you will still need testing. We currently have around 48 sizes for the V3 off the top of my head... the amount of Engineering invloved in redesigning a container for this combination is simply allot more than what most will imagine... we are not a chop shop that just chops 2 inches off the main container and hopefully it now works:S
My suggestion is that you make contact with PD (Kim) demo department and let them send you some reserves out so that you can test fly them if you have not done so.
I do not want to get into a debate as to whether you are right or wrong in your canopy choices, but as a manufacturer where do we draw the line as to the amount of canopy combination sizes!

"Start doing what's necessary, then what's possible, and suddenly you're doing the impossible!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>I just thought it was seriously ironic that Bill is so often preaching
> how skydivers are all about style over safety, then I find that you’re
> almost forced to match canopy sizes in his containers!

The Wings and the Mirage both offer large reserve/small main sizing. The Mirage M1Z, for example, lets you put a PD143 reserve in the container but won't fit mains larger than about 107 sq ft. Hopefully other manufacturers will follow suit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you think this is the trend for the industry or the exception... guess if our friends at PD can launch the new reserves this will put this whole discussion to rest...:P
Why do you say hopefully the other manufacturers follow suit with Mirage/Wings - we design what the market demands for the most part when it comes to volumetric sizing of mains and reserves...

I am not saying anyone is wrong or right, but what is the point of flying a sub 107 and having a 143 reserve???

"Start doing what's necessary, then what's possible, and suddenly you're doing the impossible!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I am not saying anyone is wrong or right, but what is the point of flying a sub 107 and having a 143 reserve???



I jump a 99 main and a 150 reserve. What is the point? The point is that a 150 main would put me to sleep and a 99 F-111, 7-cell, low aspect ratio reserve would be a helluva thing to land.

I think the V3 is where it's at but the fact that you cannot accommodate miss match canopies steers away many customers including me.

If you are suggesting I should up size my main you are wrong. If you are suggesting I should downsize my reserve you are dead wrong.
Memento Audere Semper

903

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I am not saying anyone is wrong or right, but what is the point of flying a sub 107 and having a 143 reserve???


[:/]
Eesh. Well, if I'm under my reserve, I want as much square footage as possible for starters. I'm possibly low, possibly going to be doing an off landing, possibly unconscious/hurt, and/or may have to put it down in a backyard.

Forget convenience and style. I'd love to have a rig that holds a PD-218R, or a Smart-220 reserve and a 150 main.

If I'm under my reserve, you know what...? I've had enough excitement for one skydive.
Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and
Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
guess this is a stupid comment because everyone downsizes...

instead of downsizing your main couldnt you just stick with the same size but get a more aggressive/sporty design???? couldnt you have a very ellipitical 170 or something??

if you want to have an awesome time under canopy is downsizing the only way forward??

if you could just get more aggressive deisgns instead of downsizing wouldnt that solve all your problems??

im a newbie, thats my excuse for whats most likely a stupid comment... :)
caspar
"When I read about the evils of drinking, I gave up reading."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


im a newbie, thats my excuse for whats most likely a stupid comment... :)
caspar



You're excused,

Wing loading is the main determining factor in speed/performance. Next time you see a fighter airplane note that the wings are dramatically smaller than something that's not designed to go so fast.

Brian Germain just released a really cool new book “The Parachute and It’s Pilot” among other things he goes into the dynamics of parachutes, check it out.

http://www.bigairsportz.com/publishing.php
Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Depends on what one is looking for. Also, you can only make a canopy so agressive / responsive before you start affecting other areas of flight. It's all a balancing act as far as what each canopy does/offers/gives. Increase the AoA (angle of attack) and it might be very unstable in turbulence, or might flare poorly. Make it turn really fast and it may be exceedingly prone to bad openings, line-twists, oversteer, etc...

And, probably the biggest reason, for those that like to swoop, the bigger the canopy and the longer the lines the more drag it's going to have. A Manta won't surf over 400', but a sub-100 Velocity has done it easily.

Just my $0.02 as a newbie swooper, and I'd be interested in hearing anything I may have gotten wrong or missed.:)
Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and
Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, it would appear that I stepped on a nerve with this one!

The RWS does set the lead the way and the rest of the industry trys to keep up (I’m sure John Sherman and a few others would disagree, but that’s another topic altogether)
Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

A Manta won't surf over 400', but a sub-100 Velocity has done it easily.

Just my $0.02 as a newbie swooper, and I'd be interested in hearing anything I may have gotten wrong or missed.:)



I think to say that swooping anything over 400 feet is "easy" is just not right;)
Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's what I'm doing. Usually I jump a Spectre 135 (WL 1:1.15 with no lead). Now I'm demo-ing a Vengeance 135. That canopy is way more fun to fly and is plenty fast, feels faster then my Triathlon 120 for sure. Except for the $%^& openings I love the Vengeance....

ciel bleu,
Saskia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I am not saying anyone is wrong or right, but what is the point of flying a sub 107 and having a 143 reserve???



Hmm. I can think of a few very good reasons.

I have seen people break arms, dislocate shoulders, lose both contact lenses or glasses (effectively blinding the skydiver). Any of these is a great reason to jettison the sub 107 main in favor of a reserve loaded at 1:1. Doing so significantly decreases the odds of a small mistake on landing resulting in an ambulance ride or worse.

On the other hand, those tiny reserves sure do look cool. Can't think of any GOOD reason to justify them, though.

The tightest landing I've ever had to make has been under a reserve. In fact, rarely do reserve rides end in on field landings, especially since most people, for better or worse, chase their gear after a cutaway.

Also worth noting is that many jumpers downsize their mains before they are really ready. I don't see the wisdom in advising them to make a bad reserve choice just because they made a poor choice for their main canopy.

Like you, I know many jumpers that would find landing a sub 100 reserve a non-event, but on the whole, these jumpers are the exception, and not the rule. Most jumpers are WAY better off with larger reserves.

For Great Deals on Gear


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I think to say that swooping anything over 400 feet is "easy" is just not right;)



Heh, yeah, I know, that just doesn't sound right at all. But the current record is around 450' now, IIRC. Heck, I'm ecstatic when I can break 100' on my Stiletto. :)
Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and
Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Hi Martin... Bill Booth is on a trip in Europe and is in Italy currently. Communication is limited and if he was to be looking at the site I am sure he would supply a response.
As for the canopy combination you are asking for - this is simply not a normal canopy combination setup! The fact that various other manufacturers are prepared to build a one of a kind is generous, but containers do not just scale in CAD at will... in theory yeah it all sounds great, but you will still need testing. We currently have around 48 sizes for the V3 off the top of my head... the amount of Engineering invloved in redesigning a container for this combination is simply allot more than what most will imagine... we are not a chop shop that just chops 2 inches off the main container and hopefully it now works:S
My suggestion is that you make contact with PD (Kim) demo department and let them send you some reserves out so that you can test fly them if you have not done so.
I do not want to get into a debate as to whether you are right or wrong in your canopy choices, but as a manufacturer where do we draw the line as to the amount of canopy combination sizes!



Update, I ordered a V357 (this is a bit of a cross post, but I wanted to bring this one back to the top)

I wanted a V3 to put a PD218R, and an Icarus Crossfire 159, if you look at the sizing there is no such beast. I ordered a demo PD176RM (set up as a main) as Egon suggested, couldn’t get a stand up landing out of it (240 lbs geared up, dead center accuracy just not pretty). I decided that maybe I should buy a PD193R, but looking at the sizing charts the mains listed in the 2 containers specifying a PD193R (V353, V355 both take a PD230, etc), are the same mains listed for the smaller of the 2 containers specifying the PD218R (V357 takes a PD230, V358 takes a PD260 etc.). I already own a PD218R, so I just confirmed the V357. So the main will be a little “easy to pack”, I’ll bet my life that it won’t kill me.

Yeah I know, the two canopies out issue has been covered.

Never did hear from Bill on this one.

Martin
Experience is what you get when you thought you were going to get something else.

AC DZ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0