I finally decided to downsize

[Gato 0]

I was SURE the OP was joking when I read his first post - my mistake.

As a noob, it never ceases to amaze me how much I don't know, and most of the time, I relish the opportunity to learn something new, even if it means I have to eat some crow. I account my ability to do this to my age and experience in other areas of life. In my younger days, I know I would not have been open-minded to such things - my ego would not allow it.

It seems to me that those folks who survive for a long time in this sport have developed the ability to make correct decisions. In fact, my flight instructor has told me that flying is all about making the right decisions, on the ground and in the air.

My favorite saying of his is this: "There are old pilots, and there are bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots."

I wonder if folks who make the decision to rapidly downsize are aware that they have an influence on noobs such as me. They are basically telling us to listen to our instructors and more experienced jumpers, then absolutely ignore all that information when it suits me.

So here's a noob question for you, Jeepdiver: I've been learning on a PD300 student canopy for the last 12 jumps - would it be ok for me to go ahead and drop down to a Sabre2 210 for 20 jumps, and then go for that Stilletto 170 I've been admiring?

(Yes, I know I'm a student in skydiving, and probably have no business even having a conversation about wingloading. But, aren't you still a student, as well?)

As another very wise skydiver told me, "In fact, I've always believed that noobs like you shouldn't be allowed to skydive until they've had at least 500 jumps."

T.I.N.S.

[dragon2 0]

a) canopies may or may not fly together, size is not the only factor
b) the chances of you under JUST your reserve are way higher than the chances of you under BOTH canopies at once.

a + b = get a reserve you are comfortable landing anywhere in any condition, regardless of your main.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[Orange1 0]

Quote

I did make a mistake and forgot that I did just downsized my reserve. I downsized my reserve because a 176 is to big for me.

Can a reserve really be "too big"? Not attacking - serious question - for 20 sq ft bigger I doubt the answer is yes but are there circumstances it is?

Doesn't the PD article on 2-outs suggest that it is better to have main and reserve of similar sizes?

Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

[billvon 2,400]

>Doesn't the PD article on 2-outs suggest that it is better to have main and
>reserve of similar sizes?

Yes. But if you are really, honestly concerned about a cypres firing, then a round reserve is a much better choice. First, it will land you better if you're unconscious, and second, it will not fight with a square main - the main will fall off to one side and you'll descend under the round.

Of course, since both these incidents are much rarer than your average reserve deployment, square reserves are better for most people. Likewise, a larger reserve is generally going to be a better choice than a smaller one for the same reason.

[superwoman8433 0]

The reason the 176 reserve was to big for me was that I had trouble landing it on 2 feet, same as my 170 main. I was loading it at .7 to 1. So, if there were winds I had trouble landing. Since I have downsized to the 150 and 143 (I test jumped the optimum) I have stood up every landing and I don't get pushed around by turbulance as much anymore. Yes, you will probably say why was I at a .7 wingloading until jump 70...I am very conservative when it comes to downsizing. I have a .9 wingloading now with 289 jumps.

I think that everyone should stay on a large canopy until they KNOW that they can handle downsizing. Because when you downsize, you are also cutting time out if you have a mal.

[dragon2 0]

Sure, if you can't stand up your landings the canopy is too big and you need a smaller canopy



Frankly, that's bullshit.

I jumped 280 and 230 at .5:1 for my first 50 jumps, stood up almost all of my landings, yay me. Not saying you shouldn't downsize, it's quite reasonable, but the reasoning behind it sucks IMO esp for the reserve. A reserve cannot be too big IMO.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[superwoman8433 0]

When your not strong enough to access the full flare and chow, to me that is a good reason to downsize. I jumped that canopy until I proved it wasn't my skill that was holding me back, it was the canopy. (around 70 jumps at least)

YES you can be like my boyfriend and tell me to get stronger but between work and jumping I have ZERO time to lift weights etc. to get stronger. I respect what you are saying but you should look at it by a case by case basis. What good is a bigger canopy if I can't flare it all the way and then pound in? Thank you for your input though it is valuable.

[dragon2 0]

I must say I find it worrying if it's really true you can't flare a bigger (170? now that's not very big...) canopy. You're the same weight as me (or, as I was when I started jumping, ahem), I'm a wuss, haven't done any other sports for 10 yrs, am sick all the time, and I have no trouble flaring whatsoever. Also if you can't even flare, can you pull your cutaway when the canopy is in linetwists? Can you climb out of the airplane (front or back float) and hang on? I had a hard opening once, bruised 3 ribs and almost broke my back, still had to flare for a 0 wind landing, that took a lot of strength that I had to get from somewhere, not flaring would've hurt way worse (vengeance 135). In fact, the smaller the canopy the MORE strength it seems to take to flare, depending on the model and on the speed i think.
Anyway it sounds to me like you may have a serious safety issue there. Seriously.

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

The reason the 176 reserve was to big for me was that I had trouble landing it on 2 feet, same as my 170 main. I was loading it at .7 to 1. So, if there were winds I had trouble landing.

I've jumped F111 seven cells down to a wing loading of .65 and found that they work great with that suspended weight. I think that's about the standard wingloading for classic accuracy.

You may have had a problem with the combination of the canopy model (some require larger control inputs), brake line length (longer lines mean you have to pull farther), or riser length (since the distance from steering line guide ring to riser link is standardized short risers mean you have to pull farther with shorter risers). It wasn't under loading.

[billvon 2,400]

> When your not strong enough to access the full flare and chow, to
> me that is a good reason to downsize.

Canopy size does NOT determine flare forces. Design does.

There is this odd perception that heavier loadings mean more stress on the lines and at the same time lighter flare forces. Neither is necessarily true. If you and your rig weigh 180 lbs, then the lines are supporting 180 lbs in stabilized flight.

If you can't flare a 170, it would be a big mistake to switch to a 150 you can't flare. The 150 will result in a much harder impact with a no-flare landing. Indeed, a 190 might be the ticket, to reduce your 'chows' until you are able to flare better.

>but between work and jumping I have ZERO time to lift weights etc. to get
>stronger.

Then you do not have time to skydive. While skydiving can be _relatively_ safe, it is unforgiving of any incapacity, carelessness or neglect.

[Orange1 0]

Quote

>but between work and jumping I have ZERO time to lift weights etc. to get
>stronger.

Then you do not have time to skydive. While skydiving can be _relatively_ safe, it is unforgiving of any incapacity, carelessness or neglect.

Well, Bill maybe slightly harsh there however I have to say "superwoman" that between work and skydiving AND a family i have very little time for anything else. i don't skydive as often as i would if i didn't have family commitments, but i do know i need to flare, and i do know (i have just posted in another forum on this topic) how hard it is to fly on risers being a small woman and sometimes you need to, and i'm not a very sporty person but realised my arm strength and fitness in general needed to be better to be a safer skydiver. so i leave for gym at 5.30am to be able to work out for an hour and still be showered etc in time to be at work by 7.30. Time is where you find it. You don't even have to go to gym, why not buy some weights and do some armwork while you watch TV in the evenings??
Anyway... according to your profile we are the same weight, I may even be marginally lighter. I have never had problems flaring anything from my original skymaster 280 all the way down to my current 150, though I did find the zp-exe and sabres need a bit more muscle than the pilots.

Skydiving: wasting fossil fuels just for fun.

[billvon 2,400]

>Well, Bill maybe slightly harsh . . .

Perhaps, but the results of jumping a canopy you can't flare will be worse than my words.

A chin-up bar costs about $20 and fits in a doorway. A jumper can put it in their bedroom doorway and do a pullup each time they go through the door. Takes a few seconds a day and will help a lot with bicep strength.

[RkyMtnHigh 0]

Hey Thomas! Bring your new toy out to Colorado! You'll definitely have fun with it at 5280 from sea level Jimmy T. is the swoop and canopy control instructor out here now so I'm sure he will have some great tips for you.

_________________________________________

[DSE 3]

For cross reference, it could have been worse.

[DBCOOPER 1]

This "classic post" should be locked and made a stickey.

Replying to: Re: Stall On Jump Run Emergency Procedure? by billvon

If the plane is unrecoverable then exiting is a very very good idea.

[denete 2]

Quote

Nice to know you keep making light of this thread jeep diver.....honestly I think the damn thread should be deleted........just hope that it doesn't come up again in the "incidents" forum...................

Shazam!

SCR #14809

"our attitude is the thing most capable of keeping us safe"
(look, grab, look, grab, peel, punch, punch, arch)