Micro ravens-loading and landing

[lurch 0]

Question for Micro Raven 120 owners:
What do you load it at and how are your landings?

I'm looking for anything... anecdotal stories, flaring advice, anything. I landed one of these things last season loaded at about 1.3, the flare was nonexistent and the landing extremely, almost unsurvivably violent. No bones broken but the worst beating of my life. I was landing it in a fairly bad place in the windshadow of a clifflike terrain feature, crosswind. Perfect place for a nasty downrotor. What I'm trying to figure out is whether that landing was a result of the loading, the conditions, bad technique on my part or all of the above, and if I land this thing again in the middle of an open field under ideal conditions with a more aggressive flare would it be just as bad? I've come across an awful lot of mixed signals and contradictory info about reserves, customary loading of. I know people who routinely jump mains over 2.0. Even with a reserve significantly larger I have a hard time picturing a rig put together at 2.0 main and under 1.3 reserve. Do most other similarly sized reserves simply have far higher loading tolerance? What am I missing here?
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[packing_jarrett 0]

I've jumped a Raven 109 loaded at 1.5. The landing was a nice and soft stand up. Though I've heard of many hard landings like the one that you had. I've found that the factory excess length is pretty short for my arms so I lengthened it (cat-eye to toggle setting). I think that is why many people stall there's out. The factory setting flare for me probably would have been about a little lower than shoulders.

Na' Cho' Cheese

[faulknerwn 37]

I jumped mine as recently as Sunday :-) I am about 160 out the door on a 120. It does stall high - I was trying to fly around in deep brakes to follow my gear - well I was trying to - and stalled it accidently probably half a dozen times. I have found on the MicroRavens, if I come in with a little extra front-risers on landing, it doesn't stall nearly as quickly.

When I do that on mine, it lands fine. If I don't, its tricky.

[riggerrob 558]

Last time I talked to Chris - at the Raven factory (Precision Aerodynamics) - he admitted that "Ravens land like $#@! when loaded at 1.4 pounds per square foot."
Then he launched into a sales pitch about how their new R-Max series was so much better.
Later that year I jumped an R-Max 118 and was pleasantly surprised at how well it flared.

Remember that - when Raven was designed in the early 1980s - no-one was loading mains at more than one pound per square foot, ergo no-one knew how to design reserves that landed gracefully when loaded at more than 1:1.
It was only after the introduction of ZP fabric (1988 in France and 1989 in North America) that parachute designers started to understand how to design canopies that landed gracefully at loadings of more than 1:1.
All the reserves designed since then (Amigo, Techno, Tempo, Optima, PD, R-Max, Smart, etc.) flare much better with heavy loads.

[lurch 0]

Interesting... Thanks, guys. Getting two responses this fast pretty much verifies my impression of the state of real reality with these things, that they're customarily run loaded that high or higher. I'd asked my rigger to check if the brake lines were too long when I had it repacked, he called the manufacturer whose response was along the lines of " You're overloading it and will pound in every time." I thought "WTF?" I'm 140 lbs soaking wet and have never been accused of overloading anything. Who the fuck designs a canopy that can't be effectively flared by the vast majority of the skydiving population? This struck me as a self evidently half-untrue corporate CYA answer since the placarded max weight on it is only 123 lbs. How many skydivers are THAT skinny? It implies it was designed to only be used by anorexics under around 105 lbs bodyweight. I'd bet a week's pay that the vast majority of microraven owners are way over that, and don't expect to get nearly beaten to death if they need to use it. I'd heard it stalled easy but this didn't feel like a stall...it didn't slow down then drop, it didn't slow down at ALL and flew into the ground at full speed in a steep, level descent. Its not like I was out of my depth with this size canopy, my daily driver is a Sabre 135. I still can't decide if I flared it too little, flared too hard and went through its entire flare band from zero to way beyond stall in a split second, or flared just fine and was totally screwed by the location and would have been pounded under any reserve. Am trying to find a reserve that "flares like a main". This thing came in so steep I'd have been scared to death to use any front riser, it was already coming down the way my Sabre would if I was hanging off double fronts, I'd expect adding fronts to that would have turned it into a straight-down plummet. Anybody know if a pd Opti 143 reserve will fit in a Jav NJ?
Edit to remove pointless trash talk: Canopy may not be the best but my judgement with this obviously wasn't either. I'm still stuck between "I'd be stupid to keep jumping this" or "Nobody would consider this a particularly unsafe thing to do." One judgement would ground the rig permanently till the reserve is replaced, the other would say its relatively safe to keep jumping it because most people make out fine with these most of the time and so should I if I have to use it again. I'm leaning toward "i'm being stupid" but a 120 just doesn't seem like its even close to an unreasonably stupid decision given that bigger people jump smaller microravens commonly enough to get more than one to answer this thread in less than 24 hours. I'm still gonna upgrade it, just can't decide if it'd be terminally stupid to jump it till then.
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

One question, how many 7 cell landings do you have?

[lurch 0]

Somewhere between 30 and 45, none in the last year, most of em on either a 218 as a fresh A license or a Tri 160 when I borrow a friend's wingsuit rig. If I ever heard of a 9-cell reserve I'd buy it- I appreciate a 7-cell has its advantages but I do not like to fly them. Spoiled by years on Sabres that can rear-riser 2 miles home from 2200 feet in a pinch, to me a 7 flies mushy, has very poor long-spot range and comes down way too steep. That said, everything I know says I should have been able to land this thing no problem. This is the first time I've ever failed to land a 7 cell or even had any issues with suddenly flying one, a Triathlon is an awesome canopy, as 7's go and I don't hesitate to borrow one if its offered. I -should- be alright if I can avoid that terrain feature/wind thing again, but if I'm wrong I won't know until after I try and fail to land it in an open field far from buildings and major terrain irregularities. This fact has me scared to jump the rig again. I'm still not sure if I should be or not. Its driving me bugshit.
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[JohanW 0]

Quote

.. It implies it was designed to only be used by anorexics under around 105 lbs bodyweight ..

It was.

The comparison to your Sabre 135 goes wrong on two points: material, and number of cells.

Johan.
I am. I think.

[mr2mk1g 10]

Why did you buy a Microraven?

Quote

You're overloading it and will pound in every time." I thought "WTF?" I'm 140 lbs soaking wet and have never been accused of overloading anything. Who the fuck designs a canopy that can't be effectively flared by the vast majority of the skydiving population? This struck me as a self evidently half-untrue corporate CYA answer since the placarded max weight on it is only 123 lbs.

So the manufacturer posts a max weight. You exceed it. You then get told by the manufacturer that you are exceeding the max weight and the canopy won't land well...

I'm failing to see how this is anything but a problem you created for yourself. You've now been told directly by the manufacturer that you're going to hurt yourself if you keep flying this canopy... how about you don't fly it again?

Quote

How many skydivers are THAT skinny? It implies it was designed to only be used by anorexics under around 105 lbs bodyweight. I'd bet a week's pay that the vast majority of microraven owners are way over that, and don't expect to get nearly beaten to death if they need to use it.

Again, I fail to see how this is anything other than another example of us skydivers being dumb in the extreme. A company designs a canopy for anorexics, posts max weights that can clearly only be met by anorexics... then stupid people come along and ignore them.

Aside from checking into the weight of everyone who expresses an interest in buying one of their canopies, even when bought via third parties, shops or dealers, then refusing to sell to them and, for that matter, banning all re-sale of their canopies on the second hand market... I can't really see what more the manufacturer can reasonably be expected do to save us from our own stupidity.

Ok, they probably know most people are ignoring them and they're arguably open to criticism for still taking people's money... but how far should we really be asking them to go in protecting people from their own dumb decisions?

Max weights are there for a reason. Poor landing characteristics are probably the least serious of the reasons why they're there!

[peek 20]

I jumped one years ago loaded at slightly more than 1 to one and if I flared it well I actually got a slight bit of "swoop". But when used during a reserve ride by a less experienced jumper, the flare might not be so ideal, and the landing might be harder.

Plus, people's expectations are different than when the Raven was designed. They seem to be expecting their reserve to land like their main, but that only happens if they practice a landing in their reserve.

But jumping their reserve as a main is too much trouble, even when the manufacturers make this easy.

And PLF? Well, no one seems to even consider doing one now.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

I have only landed my Raven 150 (1.3:1) once but I found it to be very easy and predictable.
Much better than the previous two reserve landings on my SAC 22'.

[riggerrob 558]

["... the placarded max weight on it is only 123 lbs. How many skydivers are THAT skinny? It implies it was designed to only be used by anorexics under around 105 lbs bodyweight."

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

Yup!
The Micro Raven 120 was originally designed for tiny, Japanese woman.
The designer never expected stupid, fat, white men to jump reserves that small.

[lurch 0]

Hmmm. You haven't been paying attention, your sarcasm is less than useful and nowhere in your post do you actually offer any information that contributes noticeably to the discussion or the issue being addressed.
I am attempting to resolve the conflict between what the manufacturer has said and the fact that these things are overloaded commonly enough to get 2 answers in under 24 hours. Most functional adults with gear would overload this considerably. This rating is so extremely weak that to stay safely "well within and under" its max rating I'd have to be 85-95 lbs to leave room for gear and 10 lbs of headroom. This is absurd. Since a Microraven is not exactly a rare canopy but a skydiver under 123 lbs exit weight IS, it implies that a great many, possibly the majority, of these things are being used in such a fashion and the owners do not expect to get pounded. This conflicts directly with the manufacturer's statement.
I'm big on personal responsibility. To be responsible requires me to exercise judgement. Judgement requires information, and all the information I have conflicts with itself. Whether or not the earlier responders to this thread have no problem flying one isn't really a decision factor for me. It is useful "state of things" data that backs up my impression of a rather large disconnect in the sport between load ratings and actual use. I've already returned my older 170/218 rig to service because I don't like having something on my back I'm not all that sure I could land successfully if I have to again, even though to all appearances I should be able to. I'd rather be unstylish and fly a sluggish rig than pound again. I flew that rig with a brand new Sabre2 170 loaded at .9 and a ridiculously oversized 218 reserve for my first 5 years of jumping, bought specifically to ensure my ego didn't write a check my ass couldn't cash and guarantee a huge margin for error. I'm told this kind of caution with canopy progression is extraordinarily rare. The purpose of this thread was to attempt to resolve the conflict between the perceived common use status of these Micro reserves and the manufacturer's rating matching the experience I had when I used it myself. The action necessary to prevent a repeat is obvious... the reason the majority of these reserves would appear to be overloaded and expected to work fine is not.
There seem to be two sets of standards in play simultaneously here. One says I'm a dumbass-and by extension so is everyone else over 123 lbs exit weight who has jumped with one of these things on their back. Thats calling an awful lot of highly experienced jumpers dumbasses. The other standard says its easy to find people who jump these things all the way up to around 1.8, 1.9-ish and they do not consider this unsafe enough to regard it as anything like unacceptable. The cognitive dissonance on this is something of an issue for me since I seem to have got off light, yet I'm being MORE conservative than others more experienced than I who would not regard this as anything like an unacceptable risk. Since this 120 is not as safe for me to jump at this loading as the state of things led me to believe I will find another that is. But that doesn't address the nature of or resolution to the trap I fell into in the first place.
Now, if you'd like to actually contribute to this discussion, what is YOUR reserve, what is its rating and what are you loading it at?
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[980 0]

if you look up Rob's other posts you will find plenty on the subject of overloaded old microravens

what some people seem to be negelecting here is that there is a huge difference in how a 135 and 120 flies, factor in the differences between the required flare technique for an old reserve design that was never intended to be loaded that high and a ZP 9 cell that is far more tolerant of a wide variety of flaring techniques and I think it might make a little more sense why you pounded in while some people are fine landing that reserve at that loading

as wingloading goes up, your control 'window' gets smaller and the canopy gets less forgiving of sub-optimal control inputs

on a more modern reserve design, you will have a much easier time getting a soft landing at the same wingloading

people overloading reserves by a factor of almost 2 and not considering it unsafe are not being very smart

don't waste your time trying to get to the bottom of why some skydivers routinely do stupid things, rather go out there and demo a few different reserves in a few different sizes and find out for yourself which one you want on your back

that's how people should decide on their last chance, by trying it out in controlled conditions first

[lurch 0]

Rob,
I AM white, I may be stupid but I'm certainly not fat. I'm a 135-140 lb acrobatic light-athlete kind of critter. I climb structures for fun, think nothing of leaping off a 10-foot high object and consider walls to be just floors with really poor traction. If that is considered fat now, no wonder America thinks it has an obesity problem. I guess "gaunt" is the new "healthy look"? Guess I didn't get the memo. My bad.
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[riggerrob 558]

Glad to hear that your sense of humour has returned!

[billvon 2,427]

>Most functional adults with gear would overload this considerably.

Correct. That's true of the PD106R and the VX39 as well.

>This rating is so extremely weak that to stay safely "well within and
>under" its max rating I'd have to be 85-95 lbs to leave room for gear
>and 10 lbs of headroom.

Also correct.

>This is absurd.

Why is it absurd? We used to get 90lb Japanese women who did not fit any of our student rigs. We had to order a "small woman" rig from RI specifically for them. Not all gear works for all people - and the MR120 was not designed to be heavily loaded. It is not at all like a Sabre2 120, and cannot be landed the same way.

>The purpose of this thread was to attempt to resolve the conflict between
>the perceived common use status of these Micro reserves and the
>manufacturer's rating matching the experience I had when I used it
>myself.

I know a few people who use these. I watched two people break legs/ankles trying to land them (a 120 and a 135) and watched someone else land it with no problem. The problem arises when a jumper expects a MR120 to land like a Sabre2 120. It does not. You need a lot of experience with overloaded low performance parachutes to be able to safely land a MR120 at heavy loadings - and most jumpers do not have that experience.

If you want to continue to overload that reserve, I recommend you put 10-15 jumps on it as a main so you can figure out how to land it. Choose good days - damp grass, moderate winds - so errors are not as painful.

[lurch 0]

Hey I wasn't responding to Rob there. That was directed at Mr2mk1g mostly for answering like a lawyer rather than a jumper. Everyone else who has stopped by including Rob and yourself were far more helpful. I've taken the trouble to try to educate myself in the sport and play extremely conservative in canopy choice, but theres a big enough information gap about reserves that I got my ass bit the second I stepped outside my 5-year hypercaution canopy policy. Given the same available info and experience I'd have made the same choice again. If I can collect enough anecdotes and general info about why I was able to misjudge it this badly given the caution I used getting to this point, maybe I'll spot the next similar trap before I stick my foot in it. I made it 6 years in this sport without breaking anything, I'd like another 36 more and this is the closest I've come to ruining that. I figured understanding this was worth looking like a dumbass in public if necessary. Theres people running around providing vast amounts of easily accessible info about mains, loadings and appropriate uses. Everyone knows a lot about Sabres, Stilettos, Spectres and VX's. It would take an effort of willful ignorance to be a dumbass in your choice of main. The same isn't true of reserves.
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[pchapman 262]

So we're talking about a Raven 120 (Micro Raven 120) with a listed "absolute maximum" weight of 123 lbs, (and a "recommended maximum" of 117 lbs).

In the debate about "you must listen to the manufacturer", or "what the hell do you expect if you don't listen to the manufacturer", I always wondered to what degree the manufacturers were in on the whole charade... and whether their message was consistent and believable.

Let's try a history lesson and compare stats from the 1993-1994 Paragear catalogue:

Precision Raven 120...123 lbs "absolute max."

Precision Monarch 120 main (Sabre-like) ........144 lbs "absolute max."

PD Sabre 120 main.... 132 lbs "maximum suspended weight"

PD 126 reserve............151 lbs "maximum suspended weight"

[... but its PIA size is 137 or something, so a better comparison is the next size down, that wasn't yet available. From a later catalogue:]

PD 113 reserve.............136 lbs "maximum suspended weight"

[From the '97 catalogue - no weight in the '93 catalogue I think because it was so new:]

PD Stiletto 120 main....156 lbs "maximum suspended weight"


Reaction:

Snickers and laughter!

Yeah, right, the industry fully believed manufacturers' weight limits. Nobody more than 130 lbs body weight ever jumped a Stiletto 120. (Allowing about 25 for gear and a little slack.) And nobody over 125 lbs ever bought a PD 126.

It's not as if PD wrote angry letters to Parachutist magazine about all those top jumpers and teams in the 1990's who had little Stilettos and PD 126's, about the horrible example they were setting.

(Sure, mains are not the same as reserves so comparisons are not always the best. For reserves one is more interested in the average jumper, while for mains exceeding limits is more of a question for the experienced.)

Note that PD's reserve numbers, even in the early days, did start out higher than the competition

I'm not 100% sympathetic with skydivers who don't at least "make the best of a bad thing" by doing practice flares to help plan their landing under their small Raven.

But the manufacturers clearly have been hiding behind old maximum weight statements that became ignored both by jumpers and the manufacturers.

By some point it was clear to the industry what was going on in practice, both about overloading compared to the original numbers, and about an unusually large number of people stalling in under small Ravens. Precision could then have pushed hard to actually educate buyers of their reserves, telling them just what to expect from a small Micro Raven loaded outside the originally planned 'safe' range.

It probably didn't help that they didn't want to say that despite small PD's landing fine when overloaded, small Precision reserves have to be treated very carefully -- it's not extra speed, but a high stall point. (A stall point that can fool even the seemingly prepared -- hard for anyone to resist flaring further than their shoulders when about to hit the ground.)

Precision might get not get as bad publicity if they owned up to this. (One can't even find a Raven or R-max manual on their web site, last I looked. The company just isn't coming across as communicative.)

[980 0]

I don't understand.

A simple search of this forum with 'microraven' as the search term gets me enough info that I wouldn't choose to overload one.

Given that reserves are relatively cheap compared to other skydiving gear and you can get a variety of other reserves that would fit your container and be within the manufacturers placarded limits, why would you choose the one that you are outside of the manufacturer's limits?

Why would you consider this approach conservative?

I stand by my view that no skydiver should buy a parachute they haven't demo'd yet. It's even more important on your reserve than your main.

[faulknerwn 37]

It is definitely about knowing how to fly it though. Most people I know with MicroRavens have ones that were manufactured in the mid-1990's. Parachutes were different then..

I load my MicroRaven 120 at 1.33 and am comfortable landing it in any conditions. I do have 3000 jumps under small 7 cells though. If you try to land a 15 year old F111 7cell like you would a 2007 9-cell ZP, you won't have a good landing.

MicroRaven's are definitely not my favorite canopy, but I'm completely comfortable landing them.

[lurch 0]

Thanks, Bill. This is exactly the kind of anecdotal evidence I wanted.

This
"I watched two people break legs/ankles trying to land them (a 120 and a 135)"
by itself is enough to convince me that by the standards by which I judge my main, this reserve belongs in a dumpster or a museum.
Or the rig of an amputee midget with an eating disorder. Pick one.
I'd take your advice about jumping it as a main but would be scared shitless to attempt to land it again under any circumstances on anything but water. The last 100 feet of that descent had that sickeningly wings-clipped sensation you normally only get right after turbulence turns your canopy to a crumpled ball. That alone wouldn't do it- its the memory of feeding it a carefully modulated flare, ramping up the toggle stroke as the remaining altitude vanished and getting no response whatsoever that does it.
I knew to expect an easier stall than a main, I'd already read the threads in here about that. I also knew to expect typical sludgy 7-cell handling. I've stalled every ride I've flown up high, just to get the feel. I still don't even know if a stall was involved with this- prior to a stall I'd expect to feel it coming, it'd be on the far side of SOME sort of change in direction or feel. I was prepared to back off the flare if it decelerated and then felt wobbly. I never did because it never even began to decelerate or level off. I've watched the resulting video about 30 times and still can't believe I took a hit like that without a mark to show for it. I don't know if you've ever experienced total brake failure in an old poverty-level car but it was the same sensation you get when the pedal suddenly goes to the floor so slack it has no effect on the vehicle at all. The canopy flew into the ground at a speed and angle I'd only ever experienced in a maxed-out double-front dive on my Sabre.
So.
I'm changing the question now.
Question is, of anyone who finds this thread that has landed more than one type of reserve, what reserve landed the most like a main? I know not to expect Sabre handling out of anything 7-f111, but of the models out there, which ones subjectively felt most familiar? Widest, strongest flare, lowest descent rate for the loading, quick response, easiest to land well even when you knew you screwed it up? I'd settle for one that flies like a worn-out Triathlon with the ZP washed off. My old starter rig's raven II 218 was almost comically oversized but it could also nearly hover on the thermal off a cigarette and hang at 5 feet altitude and a dead standstill for 30 seconds with half a flare. Crosswind. Around dust devils. In a blizzard. I only used it once and landed it on rubble near the parking lot. The brochure would call it "magenta" which translates out to a gigantic slow violently hot pink security blanket. Felt quite safe jumping it even if it did have a small risk of retinal trauma due to overexposure to its fluorescent majesty. You could grow crops under it during the off season. Simply showing it to people is considered aggravated assault in 11 states. Clothing in colors half this obnoxious was banned in most european countries 22 years ago as a threat to public safety along with Bart Simpson t-shirts and those rubber sandals all the kids have been getting their feet caught in escalators with lately. I had to buy my rigger a pair of sunglasses, some SPF 50 and one of those mesh panama hats people always bring back from Aruba just to get him to pack it. Coolest. Reserve. Ever.
-B

Live and learn... or die, and teach by example.

[flipper 0]

Question is, of anyone who finds this thread that has landed more than one type of reserve, what reserve landed the most like a main? ........

Smart 99 @ 1.8 .... Responsive ... good lift on landing

Smart 110 @ 1.68 ... as above

Tempo 150 @ 1.23 ... Slow (!) .. not much lift

PDR 126@ 1.46 ... Flew well ... good lift on landing

I am happiest with the Smart 99 or the PDR 126, fly real well and lots of power when needed

hope this helps


Flipper

[dragon2 0]

I've jumped a Transfair (Techno) 128 at 1.2 or so, lands beter than a Lightning 126. PD126, landed 2nd best. Micron (copy of Tempo??) 170 at .8, how hard can that be after the smaller ones? Right.... no flare whatsoever, got rid of it half an hour after my ride on it.

In 7 rides as reserves and 10 as main, I've come to the following conclusion:

Give me a Techno anyday (flies and lands the most like a modern main), PD is very good too, don't want anything else for a small reserve. Smart I'd consider too, I've heard good things about but haven't jumped one yet.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[monkycndo 0]

Hope this helps.

50 donations so far. Give it a try.

You know you want to spank it
Jump an Infinity