Chute size for new jumper.

[highlee369 0]

I am finishing up my aff soon, and would like to know what is an appropriate chute size to be shopping for. Is it ok to go straight to a 150 main chute?

[freeatlast 0]

If you do a search on this forum - you'll see that this is an often asked question.

Generally as a new jumper your maximum wingloading should not be higher than 1.0.

Your wingloading is calculated as dividing your exit weight in lbs (your weight plus your gear) divided by the size of canopy chosen so if your weight is roughly LESS THAN 130 lbs and your instructors are happy with your canopy skills then a 150 is as small as you should go.

However you should discuss this with your instructors first as various canopies have different performance characteristics and not all 150 canopies will fly the same ...

[highlee369 0]

I weigh 180 pounds, so is there no way i could manage if i buy a rig with a 150 chute, after i finish my aff?

[lost_n_confuzd 0]

Quote

I weigh 180 pounds, so is there no way i could manage if i buy a rig with a 150 chute, after i finish my aff?

180 + 30 lbs of gear and clothing = 210 lbs

210 lbs / 150 sqft = 1.4

1.4 + Your (and mine) experience level = Not reccomended

Edit: link to good info on wing loading

http://www.performancedesigns.com/docs/wingload.pdf

[Joellercoaster 6]

Quote

I weigh 180 pounds, so is there no way i could manage if i buy a rig with a 150 chute, after i finish my aff?

Is there a way you could manage? Sure. And I'm sure someone will pipe up saying they did it and didn't die so it must be OK (but actually this is always a post about them and how great they are, thinly disguised as a reply to your question).

Are you drastically increasing your chances of hurting yourself? I reckon. 1.4 is a high wingloading for someone with a few hundred jumps, let alone a few dozen.

Should you buy a 190 or a 210 instead? Absolutely. I did, I didn't hurt myself (though I came close once or twice, as people do), and I had a great time. It's no guarantee of safety, but it's a huge improvement.

--
"I'll tell you how all skydivers are judged, . They are judged by the laws of physics." - kkeenan

"You jump out, pull the string and either live or die. What's there to be good at?

[FrEaK_aCcIdEnT 0]

What are you currently flying on AFF???

ExPeCt ThE uNeXpEcTeD!
DoNt MiNd ThE tYpOs, Im LaZy On CoRrEcTiOnS!

[antonija 0]

Talk to your instructor. He/she knows you and saw you under canopy, he/she also knows your tendency to panic and doing stupid shit when you should remain calm. That is why you have people jumping 1.4WL with not so many jumps doing "just fine" and you also have people flying 1.0WL turning low and killing them selves. Just talk to your instructor.

I understand the need for conformity. Without a concise set of rules to follow we would probably all have to resort to common sense. -David Thorne

[councilman24 36]

No

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[councilman24 36]

No

Keep asking and I'll keep saying the same thing.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[Baksteen 84]

Why would you even *want* to?

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[AHoyThere 0]

Another excellent guide for downsizing recommendations...

http://www.bigairsportz.com/pdf/bas-sizingchart.pdf

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

Talk to your instructor. He/she knows you and saw you under canopy, he/she also knows your tendency to panic and doing stupid shit when you should remain calm.

I've visited three instructors in the hospital and know two who died because they didn't know enough about canopy flight. There's a good chance that your instructor doesn't know enough.

With a few exceptions your instructor doesn't know as much as Brian Germain so you should be starting with Brian's recommendations and only favoring what your instructor has to say when it's more conservative.

Quote

That is why you have people jumping 1.4WL with not so many jumps doing "just fine"

Most of the people with not so many jumps do "just fine" because they're lucky enough to avoid situations they can't handle.

Quote

and you also have people flying 1.0WL turning low and killing them selves. Just talk to your instructor.

Such incidents are a lot rarer.

[silent_pumpkin 0]

I finished AFF last month and was training on a 170. This past weekend the DZO told me to try out the 150. To be perfectly honest I was a bit nervous, but 2/3 stand-up landings and the canopy was RESPONDING to me.

HEEEEELLLLLLLLOOOOO!!!!! I am 110lbs, ~133lbs w/ gear and that leaves my wingloading under 1 (0.89 to be exact).

What would you be downsizing from and why do you want to jump a 150 specifically, especially at your weight? I may be a newbie, but it only takes one look at all the incidents with overloading and minimal canopy experience to know that downsizing should be done over time with increasing experience.

[airtwardo 6]

No

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[antonija 0]

Quote

With a few exceptions your instructor doesn't know as much as Brian Germain so you should be starting with Brian's recommendations and only favoring what your instructor has to say when it's more conservative.

Please don't take this the wrong way but does anyone here really expect that one guy is smart enough to produce a spreadsheet that is correct for _every_single_soul_ in this universe? I do understand that Brian is a great skydiver and canopy pilot and I also realize that he has way more experience than I will ever have, but just from "the obvious" standpoint he can not posses enough knowledge to decide every persons' path without even knowing them or seeing them.

Quote

Most of the people with not so many jumps do "just fine" because they're lucky enough to avoid situations they can't handle.

The same can be said about >2.0WL rocket pilots. They actually have accidents in perfect weather and perfect spots, but no one runs up to them bitching about how that WL might get them in trouble. Somehow they earned to do "stupid things" that can (and has) led to injury or death.

I'm not saying OP should go and buy 1.4WL canopy, but I also don't feel like all those "no"s are as justified as their posters think they are.

I understand the need for conformity. Without a concise set of rules to follow we would probably all have to resort to common sense. -David Thorne

[Baksteen 84]

Quote

The same can be said about >2.0WL rocket pilots. They actually have accidents in perfect weather and perfect spots, but no one runs up to them bitching about how that WL might get them in trouble. Somehow they earned to do "stupid things" that can (and has) led to injury or death.

Yes we do.
However, the best canopy pilots didn't buy that Velo 99 when they had 100 jumps, but after a veeeeeeeery slow progression, a step by step increase, learning to fly every canopy to the limits.
I don't swoop and have only 300 jumps, but I do know this:
There is no fast path to swooping - only a fast path to the morgue.

***
I'm not saying OP should go and buy 1.4WL canopy, but I also don't feel like all those "no"s are as justified as their posters think they are.

Perhaps.

But the "yesses" are even less justified. Going student gear to a 150 at less than ten jumps?
We might be talking about a size difference of 100 sq. ft or more here!

Now, OP, I am not attacking you. It's perfectly reasonable to ask questions, especially of the staff of the DZ where you jump. Noone is born well versed in skydiving knowledge and noone will (should) think any less of you if you keep asking questions. Quite the contrary! As long as you DO something with the answers you get.. don't be 'that guy' who merely asks questions in order to find a justification for actions he is going to take anyway.There is a saying in this sport: "Stupid hurts". The problem is, that at your experience level (and mine) there is an incredible amount of things you don't even know you don't know. Asking questions of the right people is the only way to out.

So I'm asking YOU a question now: Why did you come up with a size 150 specifically?

Cheers,

Dennis

"That formation-stuff in freefall is just fun and games but with an open parachute it's starting to sound like, you know, an extreme sport."
~mom

[Joellercoaster 6]

Quote

Please don't take this the wrong way but does anyone here really expect that one guy is smart enough to produce a spreadsheet that is correct for _every_single_soul_ in this universe?

You will notice the words "smallest allowed" in there somewhere. That implies that, yes, at least one person thinks that one guy is smart enough to produce a spreadsheet that is correct for _every_single_soul_ in this universe.

It's not intended for the average jumper, it's intended for everyone. It's based on accident data, many thousands of jumps' worth of canopy flight, and of teaching many people how to fly a canopy.

Disagree all you like, but first, understand it for what it is.

--
"I'll tell you how all skydivers are judged, . They are judged by the laws of physics." - kkeenan

"You jump out, pull the string and either live or die. What's there to be good at?

[antonija 0]

Quote

It's not intended for the average jumper, it's intended for everyone.

This can be very elegantly answered with another quote:

Quote

All generalizations are dangerous, even this one. -Alexandre Dumas

I belive I understand it for what it is: It is a guideline every skydiver should consider when deciding on his canopy size. That said I prefer list of skills one should master before downsizing and not some numbers in spreadsheet with no clear description of how they got there (apart from "accident data, many thousands of jumps' worth of canopy flight, and of teaching many people how to fly a canopy" which is not a real explanation).

I'm not saying that WL spreadsheets are wrong in general or that they don't serve any purpose, but basing your decision only on them is in my opinion a big mistake. We are all unique in many different ways and it is impossible to determine our behaviour in future, no matter what approach you choose (including statistics which I find to be the most useful tool in predicting human behaviour).
While it is true that staying inside the limits proposed by Brian and others should help save lives (I wrote should because there is no proof that larger canopies lead to less accidents, even if the opposite (small canopies lead to more accidents) is "proven") in my mind this is not a reason to limit everyone because of it.

To explain my "position" with an analogy: We are all allowed to drive cars (some limitation apply). Any cars as long as they are road legal. This means Yugos with up to 65 bhp (!!!) and Mclaren F1 with 550 bhp (road version). Clearly Mclaren is deathtrap compared to yugo and any reasonable person will shy away from such engine or at very least drive it very very carefully.
I apply the same to skydiving: One is allowed to jump any canopy he/she desires, but just like with cars there are guidelines and recommendations what skills you should master before getting into fast rockets and killing yourself (along with others).

This is the base of "common sense". Knowing when to seek further knowledge to judge situations correctly. Jumper with 80 jumps is by no means experienced so his personal knowledge wont go very far. Combining his humble experience with recommendations in form of skill list and spreadsheets combined with opinions from instructors (mostly several k jumps and hours under canopy) and other jumpers (experienced canopy pilots) should make for a better or "more true" judgement of the situation. But since people die even if they stay well inside the limits of those spreadsheets it is unreasonable to expect anyone's (including Brians) judgement to be correct or true.

There has never been and there will never be a "rule" that can be applied to every human without errors. "Good" examples are dead skydivers which were within limits.
I believe that each adult human should be able to make decisions for his/her self, even if it makes difference between life and death.

So here is another "interpretation" of WL charts: If you exceed recommended WL for your skill and experience level (number of jumps is really silly criteria to judge skill or experience level, even if it works in some (most) cases) you should expect a higher chance of experiencing harmful or deadly event during your skydive. Now everyone can decide for themselves if added risk is worth it or not.

To the OP: My personal opinion at your jump number was that 1.4 WL is too aggressive for my level.

I understand the need for conformity. Without a concise set of rules to follow we would probably all have to resort to common sense. -David Thorne

[Joellercoaster 6]

Quote

Quote

It's not intended for the average jumper, it's intended for everyone.

This can be very elegantly answered with another quote:

Quote

All generalizations are dangerous, even this one. -Alexandre Dumas

I belive I understand it for what it is: It is a guideline every skydiver should consider

I see what you're saying, and I may even understand why you're saying it. But you're still wrong (not about the generalizations and the quote, just about the intention of the document).

Brian Germain and his supporters are (or were) proposing that chart as a rule, to be adopted as part of US skydiving's basic safety regulations. The "do not exceed" sizes in italics next to the main numbers are intended for the talented, the current and coached - that's the wiggle room for the people to whom the normal guidelines would be needlessly restrictive.

This makes some people uncomfortable, but it doesn't make it any less true.

It's only 500 jumps, which is not a big number. After that you can jump what you want if you don't exceed the manufacturer's recommendations. That's not oppressing the madly talented (or, as in your example, people who think they want to take the risks because they understand them), that's just protecting people who don't know what they don't know.

--
"I'll tell you how all skydivers are judged, . They are judged by the laws of physics." - kkeenan

"You jump out, pull the string and either live or die. What's there to be good at?

[JohanW 0]

Quote

Quote

With a few exceptions your instructor doesn't know as much as Brian Germain so you should be starting with Brian's recommendations and only favoring what your instructor has to say when it's more conservative.

Please don't take this the wrong way but does anyone here really expect that one guy is smart enough to produce a spreadsheet that is correct for every single soul in this universe?

Yes, I do.

Quote

I do understand that Brian is a great skydiver and canopy pilot

Not to mention a great teacher and a parachute designer with a lot of meta knowledge in all those fields. He does get soft, fuzzy and vague sometimes ..

Quote

and I also realize that he has way more experience than I will ever have, but just from "the obvious" standpoint he can not posses enough knowledge to decide every persons' path without even knowing them or seeing them.

That's why there are minimums in that chart. You're free to go bigger, may be a very good idea actually, even for the coached, the current, the talented.

Quote

Quote

Most of the people with not so many jumps do "just fine" because they're lucky enough to avoid situations they can't handle.

The same can be said about >2.0WL rocket pilots. They actually have accidents in perfect weather and perfect spots, but no one runs up to them bitching about how that WL might get them in trouble. Somehow they earned to do "stupid things" that can (and has) led to injury or death.

Yes, we earned that right. We know what we're doing and made an informed decision it's worth the risk.

Now hold my beer and watch this ..

Johan.
I am. I think.

[antonija 0]

Quote

Yes, I do.

Then you are wrong. We fail to predict much simpler systems behaviour let alone a human jumping a parachute from a plane.

Quote

Not to mention a great teacher and a parachute designer with a lot of meta knowledge in all those fields. He does get soft, fuzzy and vague sometimes ..

I didn't question Brians experience and knowledge but merely stating the fact that we are not (and will never be) all knowing and able to impose limitations in everything we do in life.

Quote

That's why there are minimums in that chart. You're free to go bigger, may be a very good idea actually, even for the coached, the current, the talented.

..and I'm also allowed to go smaller. It is just not a wise decision according to Brians knowledge and experience. YMMV (like with everything else).

Quote

Yes, we earned that right. We know what we're doing and made an informed decision it's worth the risk.

If you can "give" one person the right to make stupid decision about himself, why deny others to do the same? I do realize that this path might lead to more injuries and death but that doesn't give me right to limit someone doing it? And even if you think it gives you that right, wouldn't it be smarter to start at the highest death causes like smoking and such? 400k deaths/year (in US) compared to about 60/year from skydiving must mean something....

If we can allow Darvin to "take care" of so many people through different mechanisms, why should skydiving be exemption?

I understand the need for conformity. Without a concise set of rules to follow we would probably all have to resort to common sense. -David Thorne

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

If we can allow Darvin to "take care" of so many people through different mechanisms, why should skydiving be exemption?

Simply due to the idea that if things get too out of hand, the FAA will step in and take over the direct regulation of our sport. That would mean an end to sport skydiving as you know it.

Germain's chart is a great tool to use, skills to be tested are good as well; however, those are much more subjective. The chart has been adopted by many after seeing so many young jumpers who *think* they have a skill set and go too fast. They typically retire from the sport before they get to 1000 jumps after a life changing injury (or death).


(DarWin, not DarVin)

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

[antonija 0]

Quote

Simply due to the idea that if things get too out of hand, the FAA will step in and take over the direct regulation of our sport. That would mean an end to sport skydiving as you know it.

I thought about possible consequences in the for of government imposing it's own rules but look at it this way: If we (skydivers) are such morons that we will risk our lives for a bit more "woosh" on landings and looking cool at the DZ, why would government let us do it in the first place? They could simply adopt the approach they use with BASE jumping and make it illegal. Will that stop skydiving injuries and deaths? My guess is no. It would just make it illegal.

There is definitely a dilemma in me on this issue: On one hand I am very grateful that people like Brian take time and effort to produce these documents which help to keep us safe(er). On the other hand I deeply resent anyone who imposes these documents as a rule merely on jump numbers.

I understand the need for conformity. Without a concise set of rules to follow we would probably all have to resort to common sense. -David Thorne

[JohanW 0]

Quote

Quote

Yes, I do.

Then you are wrong. We fail to predict much simpler systems behaviour let alone a human jumping a parachute from a plane.

That's OK. I've been wrong before and it'll happen again. You're reading that chart for something it isn't, though.

Quote

Quote

That's why there are minimums in that chart. You're free to go bigger, may be a very good idea actually, even for the coached, the current, the talented.

..and I'm also allowed to go smaller. It is just not a wise decision according to Brians knowledge and experience. YMMV (like with everything else).

You just made my point. Yes, you can. No, it's not smart.

Quote

Quote

Yes, we earned that right. We know what we're doing and made an informed decision it's worth the risk.

If you can "give" one person the right to make stupid decision about himself, why deny others to do the same?

Because it's not an informed decision. As soon as he can make an informed decision, I will not be my brother's keeper. Actually, I will, but no longer will I keep him from taking risks I consider stupid.

Quote

I do realize that this path might lead to more injuries and death but that doesn't give me right to limit someone doing it? And even if you think it gives you that right, wouldn't it be smarter to start at the highest death causes like smoking and such? 400k deaths/year (in US) compared to about 60/year from skydiving must mean something....

If we can allow Darvin to "take care" of so many people through different mechanisms, why should skydiving be exemption?

Maybe I'm just not that smart, and I smoke myself, so I don't feel the need to start a crusade against smoking. I do, however, feel the need to keep parachuting fatalities and injuries to a minimum because I generally like the people that die, I generally like the people that have to clean up the mess, I don't want the media attention that usually accompanies accidents, I don't want the public opinion to get any worse than it already is, I don't want government oversight closer than what we already have and parachuting students don't know what they don't know.

Johan.
I am. I think.

[antonija 0]

Quote

Maybe I'm just not that smart, and I smoke myself, so I don't feel the need to start a crusade against smoking. I do, however, feel the need to keep parachuting fatalities and injuries to a minimum because I generally like the people that die, I generally like the people that have to clean up the mess, I don't want the media attention that usually accompanies accidents, I don't want the public opinion to get any worse than it already is, I don't want government oversight closer than what we already have and parachuting students don't know what they don't know.

Don't you think it's a bit selfish to impose this rule on everyone else just because _you_ don't want to see more government oversight, etc.?
The fact is that 400k people die from smoking related problems each year in US. Number that high quickly transforms into "just a number" simply because it is really hard to imagine 400k dead bodies as a pile of meat. On the other hand it is very easy to imagine one skydiver dig in times 60.

If you wish to save lives, you have much bigger fish to fry than skydiving fatalities. If you really want to help skydivers make informed decision then please don't preach them downsizing charts as the ultimate rule but take time and effort (I know that in some cases that is not possible, but we all try to do our best) to explain them why they shouldn't jump specific canopy. "You have not shown the ability to do solid flat turn with this canopy, you can not downsize" is one constructive limitation, which should be followed by student inquiring how/why/where/when should he improve to be able to downsize. Saying "because it says so in the spreadsheet" is... well... you know

I understand the need for conformity. Without a concise set of rules to follow we would probably all have to resort to common sense. -David Thorne