New PD reserve questions and hopefully answers thread. READ THIS THREAD!

[Spizzzarko 0]

With the possibility of PD releasing it's new reserve in the near future it leaves us the skydiving consumers with more questions than answers. I am posting this thread to publicly ask these questions and hopefully get a response from the good folks at PD. So if you have questions and answers about the reserve post them, but if you cannot offer factual information about it please refrain. I would like this thread to stay informational in nature, so please no PD bashing or name calling. In the skydiving magazine (Dec 06) issue there was an article telling us a little about the reserve, and if you haven't read it I suggest that you do. It is also a good magazine to keep in your bathroom to read while you "take care of business" so on to the questions:

1. The skydiving article mentioned that PD was making this reserve in sizes of 99-143. Why are they not making bigger sized canopies? This seems out of place to me because I'm fairly sure not to many rig manufacturers are making rigs sized for a reserve smaller than a 99. With the new fabric the 99 should pack up like an 80 series canopy. This will either have a soft reserve pack job, or force manufacturers to create new sizes.

Honestly I do not think a soft reserve pack job is a good thing, because it could allow things to shift around in the container, or have a sloppy appearance.

Now lets talk about the reserve sizes. There are two ways to make a container long and skinny (measured from yoke to BOC and from back pad to pins side) like the old jav or shorter and fatter like the new jav.

If the manufacturer makes the rig long and skinny for a small canopy like the 99R the main container would have to become very long and skinny. This would be a funky looking main bag and could require some creative packing techniques to evenly distribute the material through out the bag.

Now if the manufacturer makes the rig short and fat (the ladies favorite) then this will be a really short rig and a dude like me may have a problem reaching the main handle if it is placed in teh middle of my back. I currently jump a jav RSK-1 with a pd-113 over a 96 velocity and some times it floats up a little towards my neck in free fall causing more of a stretch for me at pull time. This may not be an issue for all people, but I can see where it could lead to being an issue in the future.

I think now the general idea with this new reserve is to be able to get a bigger canopy into a smaller container. This is a great concept and I whole heartedly agree with the idea. I just ordered a new container to fit my jvx. in this container I can get a 143R packed up into it, but according to skydiving mag PD is stopping at the 143. Why not make the bigger sized new reserves and market to what most of the skydiving public is jumping? I just do not see more than 25% or the skydivers jumping reserves smaller than a 126R and some of the ones that I see jumping that sized reserve probably need to be flying a 160 or bigger.

2. The skydiving article mentioned a change in the flight and flare performance of the new canopy. What are these changes and how will they affect the flight characteristics. Also if these changes are good enough to sell with the new reserves does PD have any plans on changing the old material reserves to match these flight characteristics? Personally I have landed several reserves, and by far I feel that the PD reserve had the best flight, and flarring traits. I would be interested in demoing one to see how they changed it up.

3. The article also mentioned that the new fabric strength is less than that of the thicker older material. How has PD changed the design to maintain the same TSO rating of the older design?

4. Is PD going to eventually drop production of the old design?


I love PD reserves, and I have a couple of actuall rides on them. I do not plan to jump without a PD reserve, as I feel very strongly about having my last chance for survival be padded in my favor. This thread is not meant to bash pd in any way shape or form, but instead to start an open and constructive dialog about the new product. Please keep any information factual instead of speculative if possible when making responses.

[riggermick 6]

There are two ways to make a container long and skinny (measured from yoke to BOC and from back pad to pins side) like the old jav or shorter and fatter like the new jav.



Actually there are three basic was to design a rig the two you mentioned and the third: thin and wide, thats how most rigs were made in the late 70's. Sorry, didn't mean to interupt your thread but did ask for "factual information".

Mick.

[Spizzzarko 0]

True that! If either of the thin methods (yours and mine) were used with the new 99 reserve the container would be getting to a point where the pilotchute would be causing a bulge. You can only compress a spring loaded pilot chute so much. Do you see my point?

[billvon 2,400]

Well:

a) I have full confidence that within a few months of the new reserves being released, container manufacturers will have a new XXXXRS size to accommodate the smaller reserve. The small-container arms race has been going on for a while.

b) Keep in mind that while the canopy is getting smaller, the PC/freebag/lines/risers/cypres are not. So you still have those to fit in that small reserve container.

[damion75 0]

Since we are on a serious question asking thread, which will hopefully be widely read, I am also curious to know if other canopy manufacturers will be following suit with a new material type reserve and if not, why not?

Just curious if Aerodyne, Icarus etc are planning on letting PD corner this area of the market and if so, why do they think a low bulk reserve is not worth building?

***************

Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus.

[piisfish 135]

are there any precisions concerning the definition of "near future" ?

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[beowulf 1]

You must not have read the article all that closely. It said the bigger sizes will be coming in the future and that there will be bigger sizes then are available now in the regular material.

[BKR 0]

We work on this program since a year and results looks good. We made and test several reserve canopies X-Fast and packing volume is just great, a 220 pack like a 170. High speed tests worked good, we droped at 180 kts with 160 kgs several times and no failures. The only thing we are looking now is the material distorssion, it looks like after several jumps (over 10) the material started to move just a bit. We have either several mains with 0P top skin and this low weight material on bottom, it looks good but we want to put more jumps on them to be sure.

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[cpoxon 0]

Quote

We work on this program since a year and results looks good.

Jérôme,

Who is the manufacturer of the material you are using? Is it the same as PD?

Skydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live

[BKR 0]

It is NCV industries in France (Porcher group) who bought Perseverance Mills parachute material branch when they shuted down. They are the same who worked previously with P-D. I have no idea if P-D still with them.
This company is the leader in Parapente material.

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[johnny1488 1]

I actually have an Icarus low bulk reserve in my rig, but they have no plans as of yet to go ahead with them. Just one they had around for me.

Johnny
--"This ain't no book club, we're all gonna die!"
Mike Rome

[voltage 0]

hm, there are some reserves available that pack even smaller than this new PD-R at comparable sizes according to this chart

http://www.prueferverband.de/Geraetedaten/Packvolumen-R.pdf

IIRC one of the paratec guys said that they are using this extra special material already (on their Speed reserve) for some time that PD was until now trying to get their hands on.

[BKR 0]

Quote

hm, there are some reserves available that pack even smaller than this new PD-R at comparable sizes according to this chart

http://www.prueferverband.de/Geraetedaten/Packvolumen-R.pdf

IIRC one of the paratec guys said that they are using this extra special material already (on their Speed reserve) for some time that PD was until now trying to get their hands on.

It is not the same material at all.

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[voltage 0]

So you know what the exact materials are? How do they compare regarding porosity, thickness, slipperyness, tear strength etc?

[popsjumper 2]

Not being a rigger, please excuse me sticking my nose in here...I have a concern and question.

Quote

3. The article also mentioned that the new fabric strength is less than that of the thicker older material. How has PD changed the design to maintain the same TSO rating of the older design?

New fabric strength less that the old? Sounds like going in the wrong direction to me. I saw the post on the test drops but still, less than???

Sounds like a fashion change at the expense of safety. This concerns me. I must be way off base, somehow.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[bliston 0]

Well, I understand your concern about the material being "less strong," but I think the fact it's reinforced in ways to make up for the fabric strength. The fact that it will also encourage jumpers to get bigger reserves, and that it'll be a new design that has less opening shock, fly, & flair better, in my mind, more than make up for this detail. And on the material strength issue, it seems that problems with reserve strength (not necessarily PD products) tend to be with issues of broken lines or line attachment points, more than material failing.

Ben

Mass Defiance 4-wayFS website


sticks!

[highspeeddirt 0]

lets not forget BURSTING STRENGTH.

[BKR 0]

Strenght seems not to be the problem because lines or attachments will failed first, but fabric distorssion could be as we can see so far. Use of such fabric with reserves can be managed because reserve canopies are not going to make 100 jumps. Concerning the use of this fabric with main canopies it could be different because such canopies are going to make hundreds to thousands jumps.

Jérôme Bunker
Basik Air Concept
www.basik.fr
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Le-Luc-France/BASIK-AIR-CONCEPT/172133350468

[matthewcline 0]

As far as encouraging jumpers to get a bigger, we see in another thread the people who SHOULD go bigger are thinking "cool factor" already and stating they are going SMALLER!

Maybe this Reserve should have a limit like cross braced and some hi-perf canopies HAD?

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[damion75 0]

Quote

I actually have an Icarus low bulk reserve in my rig, but they have no plans as of yet to go ahead with them. Just one they had around for me.

Sounds like you know the right people!!

Have you used it yet? If so did it handle the same as the regular Icarus reserve?

Glad to hear that it sounds like PD are going to have some competition - competition is healthy for the customer!

***************

Not one shred of evidence supports the theory that life is serious - look at the platypus.

[deathtrap 0]

Quote

I actually have an Icarus low bulk reserve in my rig, but they have no plans as of yet to go ahead with them. Just one they had around for me.

Competition is great, I didn't know they were even working on this let alone attained a TSO certification for this new reserve.

• Quote

[johnny1488 1]

I've flown the standard reserve, but not this one. I have a 149 packed where a 129 or 126 PD should go.

Again, I have no idea what plans they have or if this will ever see the market yet.

Johnny
--"This ain't no book club, we're all gonna die!"
Mike Rome

[Kolla 0]

Hey Spizzarko,

Many good and valid questions asked. We took this to our chief canopy designer, John LeBlanc, and here is his reply:
_____________________________________

Larger sizes certainly make sense from a market perspective. We are working on them but we’re not completely satisfied with our larger prototypes so far. The smaller ones exceed all our expectations, which is why we’re releasing them, pending approval from the FAA. We’ll introduce larger sizes once the larger prototypes meet or exceed all of our expectations.

On the "soft reserve packjob" - we agree. The canopy should fit the container correctly. The rig shape makes a difference and people have their preferences. I have one rig that is very long and skinny which holds a 113 and a VE-96 in the bottom. I prefer this over the short fat rigs, for the reasons you state, but it is a preference.

Market sentiment is currently that the 113, 126 and 143 sizes will be sold to people who would have previously purchased smaller sizes, and we’re pleased with that. Eventually people may chase the pack volume thing again, and go to the 106 or 99. We’re not pushing that, but we have the canopies ready anyway. We had TSO’d the current PR-99 and sat on it for about three years prior to acknowledging that we had it and introducing it to the market at the time when it was something reasonable to introduce.

We’ve been very pleased with the flare performance of our current reserves, and are proud of the comparison reports we hear from the field. However, we also acknowledge that the original sizes were designed in 1989. We believe we’re smarter now on the aerodynamics side, and skydivers fly their canopies differently now. They’re not as accustomed to a non-zero porosity canopy, so we’ve made the flare power stronger and more like a modern canopy. However, the canopy is still a very conservative rectangular design, with a conservative airfoil, aspect ratio and trim. It’s a reserve, after all.

Much of our work on the new reserve involved two areas: 1. Lowering the stresses imposed during opening shock, and 2. Distributing that shock more effectively. The aerodynamic design changes we went through are pretty extensive from our engineering point of view, though most of these changes will not visible to our customers. Due to the success of these aerodynamic improvements, the changes in reinforcing are quite subtle. This is partly because the standard PD reserve was so heavily reinforced to begin with.

Some people will want to stay with the current PD reserve, and that is fine with us. It will be the only choice in the larger sizes, until we exceed our design goals on the larger sizes. We will make the standard PR reserves as long as our customers demand them in sufficient quantity.

But we need to see this as another step in the evolution in fabric technology of the last 30 years: When 1.9 oz fabric was replaced by 1.5 oz fabric and then 1.1 oz fabric, some people were concerned with durability at each step. So those people waited for a while to switch over, just to let the early adopters test the waters. Eventually the more conservative customers became comfortable with these new fabrics, and the old material virtually disappeared from the sport market. The same thing happened when Zero-P fabric was introduced, with many people staying with 0-3 cfm 1.1 oz fabric for a few years. But now 0-3 cfm mains are rare.

Now we have made another step, and some people will want to stay with what they know and feel comfortable with. Others will jump right in at the start. Typically, the more conservative jumpers also tend toward the larger sizes, which is one reason we are introducing the smaller sizes prior to the completion of the larger ones.
_____________________________________


Grant - I hope this helps. We keep John pretty busy working on canopies right now so with his full plate he doesn't have much time to browse dropzone.com!
However, should any more questions come up, we invite you to come see us at the PIA Symposium in February - we may not have all the answers, but we will certainly do our best :)

Blue ones,
Kolla

Blue Skies Magazine

[GQ_jumper 4]

Hey Kolla,

Thanks for the post but I was wondering if you could tell us a bit more about the new fabric having less strength. I understand you guys have taken steps to mitigate the risk of damage to the canopy on opening but how much of a difference is there really in the durability of the fabric. I thought I read an article about a year ago that said this new type of fabric was almost as strong if not sligthly better than what's used now.

History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

[Kolla 0]

Hi Dan,

At this point I do not have information about the details of fabric strength.
However, the canopy has passed all of our tests with flying colors - and personally I can't wait to get one for my rig. So hurry up FAA :)

Blue Skies Magazine