Fibula, femur, or fatality (105 elliptical 1.3 PSF 127 jumps)

[skybytch 259]

If feeling it when the canopy planes out isn't possible, why does the canopy control course information in the SIM (page 152, section 6-11-F.4) suggest that we do practice flares with our eyes closed "paying attention to the physical sensation during each phase of the practice flare"?

You may think I'm fooling myself by thinking I can feel anything. I'm okay with that - because I know that the more practice flares I've done up high, paying attention to the physical sensations during each phase of the flare (ie feeling it), the better my landings have become.

[livendive 8]

Quote

If feeling it when the canopy planes out isn't possible, why does the canopy control course information in the SIM (page 152, section 6-11-F.4) suggest that we do practice flares with our eyes closed "paying attention to the physical sensation during each phase of the practice flare"?

You may think I'm fooling myself by thinking I can feel anything. I'm okay with that - because I know that the more practice flares I've done up high, paying attention to the physical sensations during each phase of the flare (ie feeling it), the better my landings have become.

Oh I'm absolutely not saying you can't feel anything. I feel very different somethings depending on what I do with the toggles and risers, and the things I do described in my previous post are solely to get a "feel" for the flare. I'm just saying that while I can feel how responsive the canopy is to toggle input, my sensitivity is only so good. I can tell when I'm going flatter, and develop a pretty good idea of the flare characteristics, but I can't tell the difference between almost flat, flat, and popping up.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[AnKaLi 0]

actually, yeah, you're right. The more that I think about it I totally see the comparison. It all comes out of the "I gotta be cool" in this sport idea.
Sorry!

[ladydyver 0]

Quote

Quote

Dear Chris,
I have been watching the forums over your rapid downsizing and reading what everyone has said....being a jumper with similar jump numbers, I haven't said anything as I don't have the experience behind me to say much. I do have to say from your response that you sound very angry and bitter from the advice that you have been given. You asked for an opininon and have been given one.....granted harsh at times. I realize it may be not what you have not wanted to hear and even not constructive at times when it could have been. Even at times I have wondered if you are just looking for a fight. I understand your desires although I have to say I don't share them as I have some other priorities that I have put to the fore front vs. the speed of my canopy. If you knew my wing loading I am sure you would be quite amused.......it is very low. I truly believe the people here have your best interest at heart....they have experienced many losses esp in the last couple years....losses that could have been prevented in some instances. I haven't had the experience of seeing someone I care about go in nor do I want that experience....I imagine once you see that, you may view the way you fly a little differently, esp if they leave behind young children or a significant other who is dependant on them

I liked this post, as it's relevant to both this thread and a couple questions I've gotten from a local jumper recently on myspace/email.

Blues,
Dave

DPH # 2
"I am not sure what you are suppose to do with that, but I don't think it is suppose to flop around like that." ~Skootz~
I have a strong regard for the rules.......doc!

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Damn sorry I missed this thread. Looks like a doozy.

Quote

I don't swoop or ever attempt any sort of maneuvers on landing

If that is the case I have a simple question for you. Why are you flying a high performance wing if you are NOT using it for what it's designed for? You are riding around in a race car, going the speed limit? ROFLMAO. Why?

I'll take my soft predictable on heading openings of my Spectre 150 any day over the unpredictable openings of my JVX. Why do I jump the JVX canopy then? Because I like to swoop and the canopy is designed to be swooped. I took the summer of 2005 off and trained full time as a competitive swooper and believe it or not, I got pretty good by the end of the summer. I was two rounds away from finishing as one of the top ten amateur swoopers in the country. But one momentary lapse of judgement and a rear riser stall later put me on my ass and out of the competition faster than you can imagine (I was lucky my crash did not result in a hospital trip) and the first thing besides "ouch" that went through my mind was, there is more to life than swooping.

Ever notice that the vast majority of the automobile drivers out there in the world view themselves as above average drivers while they view everyone else as an idiot? I know for a fact that different people progress at different rates in this sport (I've seen it with my own eyes). But you are not special and jumping a 105 at this stage of your canopy control career will not make you a better canopy control pilot in the long run. But no matter what we say here, you've made up your mind. You've decided that you are going to prove us all wrong. I wish you luck and honestly I do not wish you any harm. But you are not special. None of us are special. Of course some of us made a 1000 jumps before we decided to get into the sports car.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[hackish 8]

Some people walk around doing things for others just to try and "prove" themselves. I work in the auto industry and frequently encounter people who think they are great "racers". Usually a day at the track shows otherwise when their lap times are poor and the instructors point out a number of things they do poorly.

Similarly some people thing they're the world's next "natural" canopy pilot. I should expect a number of hard landings and coach criticism to dictate otherwise. What if your instructor says you're fine on canopy X? What nearly all of your landings are nice and stand-up? A bunch on the internet whom you've never met tell you you're going to kill yourself...

A bunch of internet racers might be correct when they say that porsche is outside your driving skills but I think the weight should be put on those you drive/fly with.

Sadly it's a no-win situation. If the pilot breaks something it's a long list of "told ya so". If he doesn't break anything then he "got lucky".

There are some people with 500+ jumps who still can't stand up their navigator 220. There are some people with 50 jumps who fly their 170 just fine.

-Michael

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

There are some people with 50 jumps who fly their 170 just fine.

I know for a fact different people progress and different rates in this sport. I've seen it with my own eyes. But we're talking about someone jumping a 105, not a 170. Big difference.

If he's not purposely inducing speed to swoop then I have to ask why is he jumping that canopy? He should be on a different canopy if he is not using the canopy for what it was designed to be used for. I would much rather see him ... or you ... learning how to swoop on a big 170 canopy then learning to swoop on a small one. I started swooping a Sabre2 190 and all one needs to do is watch the video of Scott Miller swooping a 230 to know that you can swoop large canopies. Nope our little protoge is jumping the wrong canopy for the wrong reasons.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[stratostar 5]

But....but....but he needs the faster speed for a better flair DUDE! And besides that what would you know about it anyway you old fart with your outdated way of thinking, who cares how you learned to swoop your 190 tuna boat 20 feet, that's not swooping, and I bet you land up close because your lazy to walk back......Show off.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[speedy 0]

Quote

But....but....but he needs the faster speed for a better flair DUDE!

Sadly, this is knowledge that is being spread around more often than peanut butter.

As Einstein said "Everything is relative".

I remember jumping a Navigator 280 or summat like that a few months ago. After opening I did the control checks and discovered to my horror that the toggles did not work I pulled all the way down to the right and nothing happened. I pulled all the way down to the left and nothing happened.
I checked the canopy again and it looked alright. So I checked if it would flare. I pulled both toggles down and sure enough I felt a flare. I proceeded with the main, desperately yanking at the toggles just to get the thing to turn. Eventually I landed within 3 feet of where I wanted to land and the flare was maybe not perfect but so nice, soft and slow.
I then wondered how the hell I fly my own canopy (see profile)

Dave

Fallschirmsport Marl

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Well this guy at my DZ is at 55 jumps and just got him a crossfire2 109 loaded at 1.6 I think that beats the cobalt loaded at 1.3 at 127 jumps.
I told him what I thought but does that stop him....nope. Just a accident waiting to happen

I can beat that...

Seen a guy with around 300ish jumps on a sub 100 crossbraced.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Quote

Well this guy at my DZ is at 55 jumps and just got him a crossfire2 109 loaded at 1.6 I think that beats the cobalt loaded at 1.3 at 127 jumps.
I told him what I thought but does that stop him....nope. Just a accident waiting to happen

I can beat that...

Seen a guy with around 300ish jumps on a sub 100 crossbraced.

WTF is wrong with these people? All three of these cases are wrong.

I have no problems with a newer jumper wanting to be a swooper. But they need to take the right path towards swooping. It's something that takes hundreds and hundreds and hundreds if not thousands of jumps starting on large canopies and slowly working your way down, not skipping a step in the downsizing progression, being a student of canopy flight and dedicating jumps towards canopy control. Sure playing up high is extremely important. But nothing will prepare the jumper for dealing with the ground rush of leveling out above the ground than actual jump experience.

It sure sounds like the jumper behind this thread feels that they will be okay sometime down the road getting into swooping if they can demonstrate to people that they can handle the canopy by mastering the straight in approach. But they are mistaken. Coming in straight and purposely inducing speed are a completely different can of worms. Personally I feel one of the hardest things in swooping is knowing when to get off of the front risers. It's something I call "spider senses" and it's different for each canopy and it takes time to develop. All swoopers make mistakes (ie: finding themselves in the corner), even when they are experienced. But the experienced swooper has fine tuned their spider senses and stand a better chance of recognizing trouble sooner rather than later. But I am sorry the X hundred jump wonder who has cut in front of the line lacks this spider sense.

Please people, swoopers do not want to hold the wannabee swoopers back. We just want the wannabees to build their spider senses. There are no short cuts to swooping. It's something that takes hundreds and hundreds and hundreds if not thousands of jumps to refine. We all make mistakes out there. But when you are learning, isn't it better to be making those mistakes on a larger more forgiving canopy?

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

What if your instructor says you're fine on canopy X?

Not all instructors are created (or develop themselves) equally.

I know more than a few that are not safe on their own parachutes.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Some people walk around doing things for others just to try and "prove" themselves. I work in the auto industry and frequently encounter people who think they are great "racers". Usually a day at the track shows otherwise when their lap times are poor and the instructors point out a number of things they do poorly.

Similarly some people thing they're the world's next "natural" canopy pilot. I should expect a number of hard landings and coach criticism to dictate otherwise. What if your instructor says you're fine on canopy X? What nearly all of your landings are nice and stand-up? A bunch on the internet whom you've never met tell you you're going to kill yourself...

Actually, Chris did post his videos and people did point out a number of things that could be done better, just like your track example.

Is he in grave peril - don't ask me, I'm not qualified. But I do know it's easier to correct the little things on an 'easy' wingloading rather than a marginal one.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

WTF is wrong with these people? All three of these cases are wrong.

Ignorance is bliss.

Until recently the USPA considered some one with 100 jumps an "Advanced" parachutist and 200 jumps "Master."

PD's Katana has a recommended wing loading of 1.35 for "Advanced" jumpers and 1.8 for "Expert" jumpers which sounds a lot like "Master." There are no foot notes providing different translations.

Companies use the same warning labels on all their equipment, recommending that users have 100 ram-air jumps and read the manuals or complete a controlled course of instruction prior to using the gear.

It's not surprising people get confused.

Relativism makes the problem worse. While not a lot compard to what experienced (1000+ jumps) people are doing, you've stated that wingloadings under 1.6 pounds per square foot are not "aggressive" even though parachutes are no slower today than they were 10 years ago when PD placarded the Stiletto with a 1.3 pound per square foot maximum and recommended a 500 jump minimum. The BSR proposal and Brian Germain's WNE chart even forbid such a wingloading to people with under 600 jumps experience.

Landing such parachutes straight-in, in a wide-open field, with a head-wind is not hard. Being "careful" with parachutes means nothing exciting happens until something goes wrong so people get away with those misconceptions.

The companies should provide charts which are unambiguous.

For something like the Cobalt:

NA = not authorized

Minimum jumps

Exit weight
Size 120 140 160 180 200 220 240
85 700 700 900 NA NA NA NA
95 600 600 700 900 NA NA NA
105 500 500 500 700 900 NA NA
120 300 300 300 500 700 800 NA
135 NA 300 300 300 500 600 800
150 NA NA NA 300 300 450 600
170 NA NA NA 300 300 300 400

Notes:

Jumpers must meet the minimum jump count and have 100 jumps on a similar planform at the next size up before transitioning to a smaller size

Jumpers not currently jumping this class of canopy must meet the minimum jump count and have 50 jumps on the same canopy size with a less aggressive planform.

My chart built around Brian Germain's WNE formula says 500 jumps for light weights at 105 square feet and below because those are very small responsive canopies. The next size down is 600 to get the experience after that point. It bottoms out at 300 jumps elsewhere because its an aggressive planform. The chart says not authorized for 105 square feet at 220 pounds and other combinations producing wingloadings over 1.9psf because it doesn't stop well at high density altitudes at that wingloading (hopefully, at 1000 jumps people have the experience to make their own decisions and be smart about where it does and doesn't apply to them). It says not authorized below 1psf because this might be a canopy that needs more to stay safely pressurized.

Quote

I have no problems with a newer jumper wanting to be a swooper. But they need to take the right path towards swooping.

Swooping is a separate issue. Chris says he lands straight in and is "not a hook turn type person" to paraphrase incident reports.

The problem people like him ignore is that his 105 square foot Cobalt doesn't care about that and is going to respond aggressively to control input when he's low and needs to turn into the wind or to avoid an obstacle.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

Quote

What if your instructor says you're fine on canopy X?

Not all instructors are created (or develop themselves) equally.

I know more than a few that are not safe on their own parachutes.

Older instructors came from a time where canopy flight was less an issue because things didn't happen so fast. To quote one:

Quote

You know why I broke my pelvis at 2400+ jumps? Because I learned to fly a canopy back when nobody was taught anything, and I didn't even *like* to fly a canopy. It was a necessary adjunct to freefall. So, in essence, I really never learned to fly it. I learned to do what was safe and predictable, and never once (this is a true statement) flew in deep brakes with thousands of jumps. I just zoomed around to lose altitude, usually trying to stay out of the way of other canopies. Why? Because I wasn't canopy savvy and had too much experience and too many jumps for anybody to walk up to me and say anything about my lack of canopy awareness.

I was lucky. I didn't die, but I learned a very hard lesson: learn to fly your canopy in all circumstances and in all control modes *before* you need them. I am now a good canopy pilot, not great, I never will be an intuitive pilot. But I know what my front & rear risers do, what deep brakes will do, what situations call for me to do UP HIGH, not just before impact.

Newer instructors come from the time of turbine aircraft and big jump numbers in a few years. Some haven't been around long enough to see enough happen to learn judgment. Some have been jumping small canopies for so long they forgot what could happen under medium sized ones.

Passing the right courses and showing air skills does not magically qualify an instructor to make the right recommendations on canopy size.

Brian Germain can do that. Scott Miller can probably do that (I've never talked to the guy) Others are more likely to be hit or miss.

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I'm in agreement with Kallend. We all accept different levels of risk. Some jump with AAD, RSL, low wingloading mains and reserves. Some jump with no AAD and/or no RSL and/or small HP canopies and/or no reserves.

For the umpteenth time: this isn't about Chris recognizing and choosing to accept a known level of personal risk. It's about him over-estimating his skill level, and under-estimating his risk; and then stubbornly, and arrogantly, dismissing expert opinions that don't validate his preconceived notions.

Who on this forum is an expert on Chris's landings?

You're enabling his type of mind-set by saying that, John, all to make a largely technical point, at the expense of the probable and the practical. Trust me; he'll read it, latch onto it and use it as validation.

Technically, can I be certain, sight unseen, that he's over-estimating his skills? No, but I still consider it highly probable that he is. The problem is, people at that experience level - much like a 16 year old kid who's had his license for 4 months and and "usually does ok" rounding curves at high speed in his dad's Ferrari, almost always over-estimate their abilities. The 97% of them who are not uniquely talented mistakenly presume that they belong to the 3% who are.

As far as I'm concerned, until it can be shown that he's part of the extra-talented 3%, I think it's reasonable to presume that he's not. And that's why I'm not going to say anything to enable him.

[Chris-Ottawa 0]

What difference in canopy coaching would you expect a 100 jump wonder to have at a dropzone like Deland versus a small, single plane DZ? Do you think one would potentially get more personal attention? Would more people critique the smaller DZ jumper because they can watch the 5 canopies land while they pack? How much more can this jumper focus on their approach when they know the 4 other canopies are landed, above them, landing out etc… Anyways, that's just something to ponder.

I do have to say that I find it a bit odd that I'm getting 2 VERY different outcomes. Anyone who has seen me jump the canopy says that I seem to be doing well under it, where everyone on here seems to think it's a matter of time before I go in. It really makes me wonder. I now have 4 of my landings on the 105 filmed and have received comments on each one. I have taken these comments into consideration.

I'm also going to answer a few questions that people keep bringing up.

Why do I "need" to be under this parachute?
Well, I don't need to be, I want to be. I chose the Cobalt because it had a lot of the characteristics I was used to under my Spectre as well as a couple others. Nice on heading openings and a powerful flare. Extra speed for a swoopier landing, without having to swoop. Not saying the Spectre 135 was slow, but the Cobalt has a "better" flare, ie, more progressive, easier to judge, more speed to hold the toggles and let the canopy plane out. The Spectre has a very good, but quick flare; the Cobalt has a long, deep flare. The Cobalt is also sold to beginners, and I know there are people that disagree with this, but I am not representing the company. By searching the forums, you can see that this has been beaten to death over and over and over again. I do understand that 1:1 is not the same at various sizes, and I understand why this is. I understand about elliptical and HP canopies.

Why do I need a better flaring parachute if I can't land the previous larger one?
Well, in this case, I never once said I couldn't land the previous one. In actuality, I landed it great. I loved the Spectre and would recommend it to anyone. Here is a great case of words being put in my mouth. I said "better flaring", not "something that will help me flare better".

Why do I think I'm a "natural"?
Interestingly enough, another point I never said. I said there "are" naturals, I don't think I'm one, but I do have a good understanding and it just seems to work for me. I don't have to struggle to fly a parachute. I believe I said something along the lines of "There are naturals/prodigys, and I am not those, but I have no problems landing/flaring/accuracy etc. It is not difficult for me.


Just as a point of interest to everyone out there who thinks I have no business on this canopy, which seems to be the overwhelming majority, here’s something that occurred this weekend.

I did a H+P on the canopy this weekend, 3rd jump of the weekend, and I had something scary happen. My last 85 jumps have been on the Spectre 135, and I not once had line twists. Last time I had line twists was when I was a student. So I did this jump, delayed maybe 3-5 seconds and deployed. I looked up and saw, a Cobalt with 3 open cells, sniveling, with 2 line twists. Immediately, I checked my Alti (2900ft) and decided to ride it out before resorting to a chop. Canopy inflated, dove to the right and after a 270 it recovered itself and flew flat and level while I gently spun out of the twists. After landing, I really took a long time to think about what I'm actually doing. I was scared. #1, first line twists in over 100 jumps, #2 first line twists on elliptical canopy. I expected the worst, but I was prepared to chop it. After thinking about it, I decided to jump again. All went well. I believe that the Cobalt doesn't care a whole lot for H+P's from nowhere near terminal. I've have absolutely dead on heading openings from terminal, minus one, but each H+P was cranking a 270ish turn, and one had line twists. These line twists could also be linked in part to a hesitation issue I have. Now I know everyone is going to say this is all the more reason for me to stop jumping the canopy, but keep in mind I have no problems with terminal openings. The jump with the line twists was likely due to body position and a problem I have on H+P's. When I do a H+P and delay less than a couple seconds...I get PC hesitation. Check back in my old threads, it was discussed before. If I dump out the door at 4 grand...it's a good 3 seconds or more before the bag extracts. I believe it's because I don't build up enough speed to allow the PC to extract everything. Works fine on terminal openings.

Just for everyone’s info, don’t think that I haven’t taken any of the advice in all these threads to heart. I haven’t excluded upsizing, nor have I excluded going back to a “square” planform. I don’t feel uncomfortable under the canopy, I realize the added risk I’m accepting, and I am taking the time to seriously weigh my choice.

"When once you have tasted flight..."

[CanuckInUSA 0]

Quote

Chris says he lands straight in and is "not a hook turn type person"

I've seen some of his posts in the past and I am going to go out on a limb and speculate that he likely does want to be a swooper somewhere down the road (and there is nothing wrong with him wanting to be a swooper down the road). But I am going to speculate that he feels that if he can do enough "straight in approaches" with this 105 that people around him with think (including himself) that he is a good canopy pilot and that he is ready to start swooping with it. There is a chance that he may succeed with this plan. But you, myself and many other people know that this is not the way to be doing things.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[billvon 2,384]

>WTF is wrong with these people?

They're naturals. Or they just have no problem flying parachutes, unlike some other people. Why can't you understand their skillz? They understand the risk and accept it. If you are afraid of small canopies maybe YOU better upsize and let the leaders be!

You can't say anything bad about them anyway without seeing them fly. The 300 jump guy on the sub-100 foot crossbrace might be amazingly good. And if he dies under it - that wasn't because it was a small canopy. Even experts die, or don't you read the incident reports?

The excuses are becoming so common I can almost predict them before they say them in the first place. As more and more people jump smaller and smaller canopies earlier and earlier, the excuses become more polished and eventually turn into "common knowledge." And the outliers become the reason that Joe Jumper _can_ safely jump a 1.8 to 1 120 at 300 jumps - "Hey, it's not like I'm jumping a sub-100 ft crossbrace! I'm being conservative. Not like that other nut."

Sadly, the ground doesn't much care what the "common knowledge" is - which is why canopy fatalities have been climbing so steadily.

[cobaltdan 0]

Chris,

I haven't been following this thread, just now getting caught up on current postings....

People can be harsh in these forums, but know it is because no one wants to see another friend get hurt.

If you would like I will trade you a 120 or larger demo cobalt for your 105.

Be safe.

-Daniel

Daniel Preston <><>
atairaerodynamics.com (sport)
atairaerospace.com (military)

[rehmwa 2]

That's a cool post/offer.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Chris-Ottawa 0]

Hey,

You can bet that I've already PM'd Dan. That is an incredible offer, and Dan should be commended for even considering to offer that. I didn't buy the canopy from Atair directly though, so I'll have to see how that works out.

The other problem is that I think most people are concerned with the elliptical portion of my downsize, not so much the size. I'm willing to bet I'd get the same flak on a Cobalt 120 or 135.

Anyways, I'm looking at some other options right now. One of my other options before buying the Cobalt was a Pilot, but Aerodyne won't send one to Canada and it's VERY hard to find a smallish Pilot used for a decent price.

Thanks

"When once you have tasted flight..."

[billvon 2,384]

>I'm willing to bet I'd get the same flak on a Cobalt 120 or 135.

Personally I would reduce my flak by at least 97% if you traded up to a 135! That would be a good idea (IMO.) I might still give you grief on something else; you never know.

[labrys 0]

Quote

Chris,

I haven't been following this thread, just now getting caught up on current postings....

People can be harsh in these forums, but know it is because no one wants to see another friend get hurt.

If you would like I will trade you a 120 or larger demo cobalt for your 105.

Be safe.

Man... I got a big fat lump in my throat when I read this post. Chris.... think about it please.

Owned by Remi #?

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Chris,

I haven't been following this thread, just now getting caught up on current postings....

People can be harsh in these forums, but know it is because no one wants to see another friend get hurt.

If you would like I will trade you a 120 or larger demo cobalt for your 105.

Be safe.

-Daniel

Dan, despite any past conversations between you and I, that is a VERY stand up thing to offer.

I am impressed. Thank you.

Chris. Think about it.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.