Considering downsizing?

[pchapman 262]

1.37 wing load at say 350 jumps?

Boring. It's hardly worth arguing about any more unless the guy is at 1.37 and 100 jumps...

(Or 1.35 at 118 jumps in another actual thread.)

[JanuszPS 0]

Just in my opinion (as I can speak for myself only) seeing someone in trouble should give food for thought to everyone or at least majority. There is always a number of people who do not want to learn from others mistakes, but not all of them.
It is important what is the purpose of the video and what is the reason for watching the video. If the video is to educate (as the one attached) and scared off (i.e. fatality, bad injury) I do not see anything inappropriate of attaching one for public view in this forum. Because at the end of the day someone might change his decision and go to different canopy or hold HP landings for another year or # of jumps. I would suspect that there is very little people who would watch movies like that with a tragic final with enjoyment and for entertaining purpose.

In relation to the subject, the pilot defenitely made a huge mistake and he wasn't ready for that canopy. And this is a very good reminder to myself (similar WL and jump number) to be conscious about the consequences of poor judgment and bad choice.

just my point of view
Regards
Janusz

Back to Poland... back home.

[Chris_K 0]

Quote

Just in my opinion (as I can speak for myself only) seeing someone in trouble should give food for thought to everyone or at least majority. There is always a number of people who do not want to learn from others mistakes, but not all of them.
It is important what is the purpose of the video and what is the reason for watching the video. If the video is to educate (as the one attached) and scared off (i.e. fatality, bad injury) I do not see anything inappropriate of attaching one for public view in this forum. Because at the end of the day someone might change his decision and go to different canopy or hold HP landings for another year or # of jumps. I would suspect that there is very little people who would watch movies like that with a tragic final with enjoyment and for entertaining purpose.

while I understand what you are saying, i do not agree. A fatality might make a good "scare" video, true. but it is not something you want on the open net. When you see someone go in with your own eyes the last you you want to do is re-live that situation. the video would get around, repeately being sent to those who were involved, including family.

Again, i agree from an educational poitn of view but a fatality involves way too many emotions versus a recoverable injury. the students and new jumpers just need to know that these things can and DO result in a fatality, unfortunately way too often.

Downsizing is not the way to prove your manhood.

[davelepka 4]

Quote

I have zero experience of anything below a 230 canopy, although I like to think that one day I might have a 189 Crossfire 2?! Powerful flare being the most attractive quality.

You clearly have the wrong idea about canopies. A 'powerful flare' does not mean it will stop on a dime regardless of what's happening. Any canopy needs to be flown in a proper manner, and flared with the pilot hanging in the nuetral position under the wing.

Furthermore, a Crossfire2 189 would be a poor choice for anyone under 240lbs. There is no benefit, and several problems with jumping a lightly loaded high performance canopy. The Crossfire is a HP canopy, and until you have the skill ans experience to jump one at 1.5 or more, you should not be on that wing.

Proper canopy selection is not limited a reasonable wingloading, the selection of the type of wing is just as important. Case in point would be the video that started this thread. That jumper was at a reasonable wing loading for his jump numbers, but clearly the canopy he chose was too much for him to handle with his skill level.

[billvon 2,464]

> I agree with you that injuries like this happen with depressing frequency,
>but there is a wide gap between that and "1.36 at 380 jumps, he's gonna
>pound in".

I didn't say he was going to pound in. I said you could predict he was going to.

Take another example. Let's say you have ten people driving home from the bar. Nine had one beer. One had 10 beers. If you hear that there was an accident, can you predict which guy was in the accident? Nothing's 100% of course. But based purely on the information you saw above, you can make a pretty good guess.

[ficus 0]

Quote

> I agree with you that injuries like this happen with depressing frequency,
>but there is a wide gap between that and "1.36 at 380 jumps, he's gonna
>pound in".

I didn't say he was going to pound in. I said you could predict he was going to.

Well, like I said, you can predict anything. You can predict that the moon is going to collide with the Earth tomorrow. That doesn't mean it's predictable.

Is this just a language pedantry issue? I guess in the most technical sense, "predictable" means you can hazard a guess, but isn't the general connotation that it also means you are likely to be right?

Quote

Take another example. Let's say you have ten people driving home from the bar. Nine had one beer. One had 10 beers. If you hear that there was an accident, can you predict which guy was in the accident? Nothing's 100% of course. But based purely on the information you saw above, you can make a pretty good guess.

This analogy doesn't work. The correct analogy would be: A random guy drives home from the bar, having had X beers. What are the chances he gets into an accident?

It seems like either one of us would agree with the other, given some value of X. Now all we need is a formula to convert jump numbers and wingloading into number of beers and we are set.

Lest anyone think I'm trying to defend the guy in the video, he obviously wasn't ready. He should have realized he was low at 50 feet, yet he doesn't seem to realize it even as he calmly flares into half brakes all the way into the ground.

I guess all I'm trying to say here is that I think it discredits (well-intentioned) downsizing warnings to say that this loading at this experience level is a probable hospital event. The people who you are trying to reach see plenty of other people at this mix pulling it off weekend after weekend. It just turns their ears off.

The goal here is to equip people with the tools to make a sensible risk/reward decision in their canopy choice, right? This video is a lot more productive as "Are you sure you're ready to push it like this?" than as "This is what will happen".

[JanuszPS 0]

I think also that the guy had his hands on the front risers when the video starts, which indicates the initiation and finish of the turn well too low. And the lack of quick realization what is going to happen is the most scary in that case.

My thought is that if the guy quickly enough reacted on the situation (1-2 sec earlier) immediately going from fronts to toggles, more than likely there would not be any issue at all.

I have never jumped Katana, so this is my speculation.

Regards
Janusz

Back to Poland... back home.

[jtnesbitt 0]

Where did this happen? Is that Sporto helping the injured jumper?

"If this post needs to be moderated I would prefer it to be completly removed and not edited and butchered into a disney movie" - DorkZone Hero

[PhreeZone 15]

Eloy, and that is Selena.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[jtnesbitt 0]

oops

"If this post needs to be moderated I would prefer it to be completly removed and not edited and butchered into a disney movie" - DorkZone Hero

[grimmie 177]

The jumper was on his front riser through a carving turn and held them until about 25 feet above the ground. 1-2 seconds earlier of release may have killed him for sure. He would have had even more speed and impact at a 45 degree(+ or- 10 degrees!) angle. Thus creating the old time honored tradition of feet, head, feet through the risers landing. That is usually a femur or two, a broken neck and a busted wrist or two. I have witnessed that technique about 20 times.

He should have flown a conservative approach on a 190. But since he was on a wrong canopy for his skill level he should have flown a conservative approach and risked flaring a bit high and running it out. IMHO.

[taylor.freefall 0]

Quote

Quote

I have zero experience of anything below a 230 canopy, although I like to think that one day I might have a 189 Crossfire 2?! Powerful flare being the most attractive quality.

You clearly have the wrong idea about canopies. A 'powerful flare' does not mean it will stop on a dime regardless of what's happening. Any canopy needs to be flown in a proper manner, and flared with the pilot hanging in the nuetral position under the wing.

Furthermore, a Crossfire2 189 would be a poor choice for anyone under 240lbs. There is no benefit, and several problems with jumping a lightly loaded high performance canopy. The Crossfire is a HP canopy, and until you have the skill ans experience to jump one at 1.5 or more, you should not be on that wing.

Proper canopy selection is not limited a reasonable wingloading, the selection of the type of wing is just as important. Case in point would be the video that started this thread. That jumper was at a reasonable wing loading for his jump numbers, but clearly the canopy he chose was too much for him to handle with his skill level.

You're absolutely right, I know nothing of canopies whatsoever and your information is gratefully received. The only thing I can fault my canopy for is the flare - hence my previous post - if the flare was better I don't think I would ever want to downsize.
I've had people tell me my 230 is a wise choice and good for my experience level, and I've had others take the piss for having "such a big canopy".
Right now, for me, with the 230 I have enough on my plate. When, and only when, do I feel I've mastered this canopy, will I think about a size down. I have absolutely no rush in me whatsoever.

[JanuszPS 0]

Sorry, I not fully understand. from your description appears that abandoning the maneuver quicker would kill him.
I have problem to imagine this as one of the exercises under a new canopy of first flights is to do a simulation of a quick release of the fronts and quick move the toggles.

So my question related to an immediate move from fronts to toggles 1-2sec earlier.
Janusz

Back to Poland... back home.

[humanflite 0]

Quote

He'll be paying the price for the next 4-6 months. If he had been less fortunate, I wouldn't have uploaded it.

John

That looked nasty.
What injuries did the guy have if you are able to say?

[humanflite 0]

Quote

Sorry, I not fully understand. from your description appears that abandoning the maneuver quicker would kill him.
I have problem to imagine this as one of the exercises under a new canopy of first flights is to do a simulation of a quick release of the fronts and quick move the toggles.

So my question related to an immediate move from fronts to toggles 1-2sec earlier.
Janusz

I am guessing the poster meant that if he had let off the fronts 2 seconds earlier...even IF he had jammed the toggles down hard and fully, he would have still pounded in...but much harder still?

Can some experienced canopy pilots comment on this footage? It looks like no matter what he did he was hitting the ground very hard... (eg. even if he had flared the toggles all the way)

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

It looks like no matter what he did he was hitting the ground very hard... (eg. even if he had flared the toggles all the way)

Ding. Yup, there is a point of no return during the recovery arc. Unfortunately with moderately loaded high performance canopies, that point of no takes a lot more altitude.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Renegate 0]

According to Brian Germain's downsizing chart, to be flying fully elliptical "all jumpers should make at least 100 on a non-elliptical parachute of the same wingloading, or as dictated by the Canopy Transition Course Instructor."
this would put this jumper on a 150 canopy at less then 300 jumps.
According to the same chart minimum allowable number of jumps for a 150 size with this exit weight is 300, but recommended is 400.
This guide also suggests adding one size to fully elliptical making it minimum 360 and recommended 460 (for 209 exit weight)

- It's okay to be happy to see me. Just because you're English doesn't mean you need to hide your emotions.
- I'm Irish. We let people know how we feel. Now fuck off.

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

According to Brian Germain's downsizing chart, to be flying fully elliptical "all jumpers should make at least 100 on a non-elliptical parachute of the same wingloading, or as dictated by the Canopy Transition Course Instructor."
this would put this jumper on a 150 canopy at less then 300 jumps.
According to the same chart minimum allowable number of jumps for a 150 size with this exit weight is 300, but recommended is 400.
This guide also suggests adding one size to fully elliptical making it minimum 360 and recommended 460 (for 209 exit weight)

What a pitty that those fancy chart would not tell if you crash or not.

Is this a way of telling the your fortune?

Notice that he got no sense how to fly his wing. Do you have some chart for common sense?

[grimmie 177]

The jumper piles in almost straight down. Watch the video. If he releases his front risers and stabs the brakes hard 2 second sooner he now becomes a pendulum. He would swing forward rapidly and impact the ground at a higher rate of speed. He may have been able to PLF his way to minor injuries if he got off of the risers about 10 seconds earlier.

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

The jumper piles in almost straight down. Watch the video. If he releases his front risers and stabs the brakes hard 2 second sooner he now becomes a pendulum. He would swing forward rapidly and impact the ground at a higher rate of speed. He may have been able to PLF his way to minor injuries if he got off of the risers about 10 seconds earlier.

Imagine if the very same jumper would have dedicated some time under that canopy. Checking descent rate and recovery with a help a visual digital altimeter up high. He would have implemented his plan gradually with an audible with swoop guide.....

[jakee 1,271]

Quote

The jumper piles in almost straight down. Watch the video. If he releases his front risers and stabs the brakes hard 2 second sooner he now becomes a pendulum. He would swing forward rapidly and impact the ground at a higher rate of speed. He may have been able to PLF his way to minor injuries if he got off of the risers about 10 seconds earlier.

That makes absolutely no sense to me. Even in the minimal amount of time that the guy is on the brakes, he has already swung under the wing and sinks in, as you say, vertically.

Digging out a little earlier would put him back under the wing earlier, with more height to spare to scrub off the vertical speed and end up with a more acceptable landing.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[grimmie 177]

Up thread januszPS stated about starting a flare 1-2 seconds earlier for a more favorable outcome.
Only 1-2 seconds earlier on this particular jump would have generated a huge amount of forward speed at a very low altitude, resulting in a feet/legs, head, feet legs landing, IMHO. He was very lucky to impact the softest spot in the entire LZ. I spoke with the event organizer yesterday about this incident.
10 seconds earlier would have been a run out with a PLF at the end probably.
Just my opinions, as on one can't predict the "what ifs".
signed, Katana owner WL @1.75

[humanflite 0]

Quote

Up thread januszPS stated about starting a flare 1-2 seconds earlier for a more favorable outcome.
Only 1-2 seconds earlier on this particular jump would have generated a huge amount of forward speed at a very low altitude, resulting in a feet/legs, head, feet legs landing, IMHO. He was very lucky to impact the softest spot in the entire LZ. I spoke with the event organizer yesterday about this incident.
10 seconds earlier would have been a run out with a PLF at the end probably.
Just my opinions, as on one can't predict the "what ifs".
signed, Katana owner WL @1.75

Wow, those things sounds ground hungry

So by 10 seconds earlier, what altitude are you estimating that he should have started digging out to save himself?

Signed//
Sabre2 for life

[grimmie 177]

He lets go of his front risers at about 20-25ft it seems. I'm not sure how fast he was turning left on his approach. 10 seconds(maybe just over 100ft) earlier "probably" would have given him a long fast swoop down the LZ. Being a 150 he would have plenty of flare, but run it out to a fall, since he didn't have much experience. I never look at an alti, I just use my eyes to judge what is happening on landing. I flew a Sabre 190 for almost 1,700 jumps and then a Stilletto 150 for another 1,500+ jumps. I fly a Katana 120 now and think it's the nicest opening and flying canopy for me.
I had a LONG discussion yesterday at the DZ about the hurry to downsize everyone has these days. Videos like this accident should play in all of the gear stores around the world as a reminder.
For everyone reading this thread, think about it. That guy crashed in ELOY, nothing around for MILES.
If you downsize and land out will you be able to avoid obstacles and put it down in a tight area?
I also agree with Ficus and some of the other folks responding here, you can't measure common sense when putting folks on smaller canopies.

[JanuszPS 0]

Quote

That makes absolutely no sense to me. Even in the minimal amount of time that the guy is on the brakes, he has already swung under the wing and sinks in, as you say, vertically.

Digging out a little earlier would put him back under the wing earlier, with more height to spare to scrub off the vertical speed and end up with a more acceptable landing.

My intuition is exactly the same. the quicker reaction the less damage. I would have thought that what usually makes damage is the vertical component of the force, in that instance the most important is the angle of the canopy and the suspended jumper hitting the ground. As Jakee I can see that the canopy changing the angle and the jumper swinging beneath the canopy.
Why I was talking about 1-2 sec, because I cannot see any reaction for that period of time between the fronts and the toggles. It is obvious that the jumper started the maneuver way too late so I don't disputing with that and limiting my comments/question with this what I see on the video.
I'm just really trying to understand how quicker reaction by 1-2 sec could make it any worst.
any help?
Janusz

Back to Poland... back home.