Angelfire Reserve

[fcajump 153]

Ok... It wasn’t in the budget this year, but Nancy @ Jump Shack is using one of the hardest sells I’ve come across in a long time… she’s using “LOGIC”*.

So, I've read the gear reviews on DiZzy, now I want any opinions from folks that have either packed or flown an Angelfire Reserve. I’ve not had one come through the loft nor have I had the opportunity (need?) to fly one.

So, tell me about it.

JW

*Disclaimer: for anyone that has not worked with Nancy, let me clarify... She’s been quick to reply to a long list of inquiries since mid-summer about their gear to this skeptic. Other than discussing the reasons they designed and build their gear the way they have, she has NOT pushed ANYTHING. She’s presented options and left the decision to me. Other than that, she’s a sweetie... exactly the type of sales rep I most want to work with… Of course… using this “logic” thing really is a low blow

Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

[airtwardo 6]

I took a 160 (iirc) to terminal a while back...opened soft and on heading, with my weight it landed a bit harder than I would have liked...but that wasn't the canopies fault.


*borrowed gear*

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

[LouDiamond 1]

I have 2 terminal rides on an Angel fire 125. Opened nicely and flew predictably, much like a main, good bottom end flare. No complaints.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[fcajump 153]

Thanks for the feedback.

Can't find the prices online, but Nancy sent this along (attached).

JW

Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

[koppel 3]

interesting that the 114 and 125 both have the same volume at 312 Cu. In.

I like my canopy...


...it lets me down.

[fcajump 153]

Maybe thats where the canopy is so small that the bulk of the volume is the lines and seams.

Someone else pointed out that the "Peak Force" was the same for most of the sizes.

Based on the two different max load figures shown here: http://www.jumpshack.com/angelfire.htm, I assume that this is because during TSO testing only one of the model "family" is actually tested. (I understand it is normal to test only one canopy within a model line.)

The larger models, having been tested to a higher exit weight, would therefore have recorded a different demonstrated peak force.

Again, from recollection, this figure has to be recorded on newer TSO testing, in an attempt to keep us from attaching a canopy to a harness such that the canopy could over stress the harness. Started with C23(c) I think...

JW

Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

[racerman 0]

I have one reserve ride on my Angelfire reserve, cutaway after broken steering line wound my canopy up like a dish rag. Since it was a subterminal opening it was extremely gentle and on heading with no line twists. It flew great and the flare was outstanding, resulting in the softest landing I've had since I started jumping in 76. I highly recommend it!

[Unstable 8]

I own 1 angelfire reserve and I won't jump anything else in my own rig. Fantastic reserve. Yes Nancy has that bad habit of using Logic, Doesn't she?
Here is why I love the Angelfire.... It's built like a D*#n tank. I think the folks at jumpshack must go through a lot of 1/2" trim tape and reinforcing tape in order to manufacture those canopies ~ Granted, I do believe they pack up a bit larger than your standard reserve (you may need to check the charts to verify that, but that was my impression) but safety is worth it. Being built well, I know that they are going to last and accept wear and tear well. As a rigger myself, I pack a lot of reserves that I can tell do not take the years as well..

Call Nancy and get one. Fantastic Reserves.

=========Shaun ==========

[pchapman 262]

I haven't jumped one I'll comment on their stats and promotional material:

- The TSO used isn't mentioned, but it must be C-23d, the latest. You'd think that's worth mentioning.
(Guessing it is version "d" is based on the relative newness of the reserves, the certification weights used, and having the peak force listing.)

- Even their smallest ones are TSO'd to 254 lbs. Neither PD reserves nor r-Max's are certified to the full 254 for their smaller sizes.

- Their larger sizes are TSO'd to higher limits (330 lbs) than the PD, Smart, Icarus, or r-Max.

- A reserve aspect ratio of 2.3 is a bit higher than for other reserves. (PD about 2.1, Smart 2.0, r-Max 2.2)

- They could edit their material better. What they wrote on their web page (and in the .doc's in this thread) is "With its slightly longer chord and wider cells". Um, that combination is just "bigger". They probably meant longer span, referring to the aspect ratio.

- No suggested weight limits are given. That's unusually lax. Maybe they mean it'll fly & land OK at any loading up the the FAA limit, sort of like people treat PD reserves in practice, as compared to an early 1980s designed reserve.
At least they don't give some ridiculously low limit that has people arguing whether it is an absolute limit or just a suggestion. (E.g., the Smart says max exit weight for the 99 is 131 lbs, which is laughable these days, despite being certified to the latest C-23d.)

- You can still pick the color of every cell and rib of the Angelfire reserve. That's a rarity these days. Not a big deal but maybe nice for those who think white is boring or want a "the show must go on" demo jump reserve.

- They acknowledge that the reserves pack up a bit bigger.
E.g.,
Angelfire 99 = 286 cu. in. packs up about the same as others' slightly larger canopies:
PD 113R = 286
Smart 110 = 275
Smart 120 = 293

Or:
Angelfire 150 = 390 versus slightly bigger competitors:
PD 160 = 388
Smart 175 = 384

[fcajump 153]

Quote

The TSO used isn't mentioned, but it must be C-23d, the latest. You'd think that's worth mentioning.

I'm no expert, but I am guessing that the lower sizes are 23b (as the majic number for the 23b was 254-lbs). I then speculate either 23c (which introduced peak force) or 23d for the larger ones.

Quote

- Even their smallest ones are TSO'd to 254 lbs. Neither PD reserves nor r-Max's are certified to the full 254 for their smaller sizes.

I don't put too much into that as I believe the family of canopies are tested as one. In this case the larger grouping would have been tested seporately (since they have different stats/limits. Again, we are dancing around the limits of my knowledge of the particulars of TSO testing.

Quote

- They could edit their material better. What they wrote on their web page (and in the .doc's in this thread) is "With its slightly longer chord and wider cells". Um, that combination is just "bigger". They probably meant longer span, referring to the aspect ratio.

Yea... I saw that too... Personally, I think Jump Shack (and Butler) would benefit from having a web designer/content manager, who knows the parachutes, but is NOT their engineer. There's good information there, and they are two of the companies that seem to apply good engineering to their product, but engineers are not always good communicators to the general public. And then there is the fact that any web site can be added too so much that the site needs to be "reengineered".

Quote

- No suggested weight limits are given. That's unusually lax. Maybe they mean it'll fly & land OK at any loading up the the FAA limit, sort of like people treat PD reserves in practice, as compared to an early 1980s designed reserve.

I think that's something PD started a while back that some other's have adopted. Personally, I do think that, just because it proved in testing that a 85sqr/ft canopy would not fail with my fat a$$ under it at terminal, does NOT mean that semi-concious, with on arm broken and a loading of 3:1 is a good idea... Especially when I had 10 jumps.

Quote

- You can still pick the color of every cell and rib of the Angelfire reserve. That's a rarity these days. Not a big deal but maybe nice for those who think white is boring or want a "the show must go on" demo jump reserve.

Personally, while I don't critisize the mfg for this, I think it is a bad idea to get custom patterned reserves... The standard solid color has great benefit to the jumper, including during demo jumps... The first custom color reserve I ever saw was very similar to her main... we could see the cut-away canopy floating down, and the right number of canopies open for the load, but no idea who might be in need of assistance.
With demos, I often have pilots that circle the flag jumper and we have formations doing a race-track behind the jumper. With the solid main, you've alerted all participating pilots that there may be a cutaway main out of position, drifting toward them. It also alerts the ground crew that this jump is not proceeding normally... (main to go find, reserve performance will not be the same as their intended main, etc...)

Quote

- They acknowledge that the reserves pack up a bit bigger.

Yea... this is one of the points Nancy is having to convince me is worth it... I had planned to put a smaller (volume) Optimum in my next container... but as I am coming from a Fury w/ Dacron... almost anything is smaller.

Thanks for all the great feedback.

JW

Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

[JerryBaumchen 1,068]

Hi Jim,

Quote

I'm no expert,

I'm not either.

TSO C23b has two categories of testing; Standard & Low Speed. The Standard has a test protocal that simulates ( my wording ) a 5,000 lb load & the Low-Speed has a test protocal that simulates a 3,000 lb load. While some disagree with me on this, I do not consider any component certificated under TSO C23b to have a 'rating' of either 3,000 lbs or 5,000 lbs. Many, many years ago I got a letter from Jim Rueter, an engineer with Pioneer Parachute Company, and he agreed with me that the 5,000 lb test protocal in TSO C23b probably would not actually produce a 5,000 load force. It was a conclusion that I reached after doing the Strength Tests for the Standard certification.

The 254 lb limit came along with TSO C23c and the three 'categories' under which you could elect to have your parachute and/or parachute component certificated. Virtually everyone in the sport market opted for Cat. B. Cat A = 198 lbs & 130 knots / Cat B = 254 lbs & 150 knots / Cat C = 254 lbs & 175 knots.

After having TSO C23c in effect for some time, the committee realized that the 254 lb weight limit just was insufficient. Case in point: Everytime Geo. Galloway made a sport jump with one of his Raven reserves in his container he was in violation ( just a 'smidgeon' over 254 lbs ).

Then with TSO C23d came the system/process where the mfr could pick any weight & speed limits that they wanted to test to & get certificated to ( you can thank Manley Butler for this idea ), with the caveat that there be a 'floor' of weights & speeds that must be minimums.

TSO C23d also introduced the req'ment for the Peak Force Measurement. So if you are getting a rig/canopy/etc certificated under TSO C23d it must be marked with the Peak Force measured during testing.

I hope that this helps,

JerryBaumchen

PS) And if I am wrong on any of this, I will gladly admit it.

[mjosparky 3]

Adding to what Jerry said:
TSO-C23d went into effect 6-1-94 so anyone who applied for certification after that date would have to use “d”.
The 254 lb means they tested to 305 lb, 1.2 times the Maximum operating weight. The minimum weight that can be used under TSO-C23d is 264 lb for a Maximum operating weight of 220 lb.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[fcajump 153]

(From Nancy at JumpShack:)

"All of our reserves are currently
TSO'd under C23d and SAE Aeronautical Standard AS-8015B. The difference between the smaller canopies that are certified to 254 lbs, and the larger canopies that are certified to 330 lbs is that the larger canopies were test dropped at a higher weight and speed."

Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...