Student Reserve canopies, Which is safer?

[teason 0]

Quote

The one reason I could see considering them is if you use an old AAD (like a Sentinel) that misfires often; a round is the reserve to have if you have two out.

FXC 12000, while being more reliable than a sentinal, can fire upto within 1500' of the set altitude (it's printed right on the side). That means a smaller margin for error with getting a main out than with a Cypres.

By the way, if you do the math, a new cypres will cost you about $1625 or $135.42 per year over 12yrs. A new FXC 12000 would be $1490 or about $124.17 per year over 12yrs(both are based on the min. maintenance) The math seams simple if you're getting new gear.

Just something to think about if you're choosing new gear

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[obelixtim 100]

Well, I used FXC's for over 20 years and I never ever saw one fire more than 100 or so feet outside the set altitude....

I found them a really reliable, user friendly AAD....no shagging around with batteries, special loops, cutters, or slippery pull up cords when packing.

If I had a student AAD fire for whatever reason, (usually a low dump from a f/f student), I could get that rig back in service within an hour.....

Also chamber tests could be done on the airfield by my local avionics technician......

Very little downtime.....and very tough and rugged units could take the knocks and bumps......

Rounds versus squares........it isn't even an argument........squares 100.....rounds 10.....

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[teason 0]

Quote

Well, I used FXC's for over 20 years and I never ever saw one fire more than 100 or so feet outside the set altitude....

We have 12000s too and it is rare but it can happen according to FXC and what I've seen.

I agree with you on the durability, I knew a rigger who claimed he hammered a nail into a 2x4 with the unit to prove a point (maybe BS though, seems like a dumb way to prove a point)

Quote

If I had a student AAD fire for whatever reason, (usually a low dump from a f/f student), I could get that rig back in service within an hour.....

I hope you take longer than that, ya gotta inspect it. Students walk on those things and drag them around!
Also, changable field cutters are available from cypres but I agree setting a 12000 is easier and more convenient.

Opinion is wildly in favor of squares, no doubt, but
I'm looking for something more than "we all like 'em"

Many years ago, someone I respect a great deal told me "Answers mean nothing because they can change, It's the questions that matter"

This debate shows that the original question is flawed. There are to many other questions; Training, topography, AAD choice.

If you ask me which is better, I'll tell you a square is. If you ask me which is safer for students at a DZ, with a given the training method, the landing area and the AADs, the answer will probably change from DZ to DZ.

That's why I'm curious about changes DZs have made to training if they have squares (see original post)

I can't change the topography, but Training and gear....

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[PhreeZone 15]

My DZ took the approach that people are smart enough to land a reserve just like their main. Also taught is the procedures for a 2 out situation with a square main. When is a better time to learn and be drilled about the stuff? When you are fresh and new and get asked it every jump, or later when you get your own gear and don't want to go around asking questions like what to do in a 2 out? It might be totally approriate to ask the question since the gear changed, but many jumpers feel silly asking what they think are stupid questions. So whay not teach the jumper right from the beginning exactly what they will be experiencing every day at the DZ once they get their own gear? Studies have found that people tend to revent to their original training in situations of high stress or panic. I think that tends to describe most peoples reactions to a cutaway. Do you want them to revert to trying to land their future square reserve like a round, or their student square like a round since they got two different instructions and only remember one?

Its the same reason we don't train on front mount reserves, SOS, ripcord or anything else not found on a normal sport rig. Its better to train them properly once in the beginning then have to retrain them for every new piece of gear later.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[teason 0]

Quote

Also taught is the procedures for a 2 out situation with a square main. When is a better time to learn and be drilled about the stuff? When you are fresh and new and get asked it every jump

Good point. With square reserves, it demands a higher level of awareness in a two situation. Learn correct procedures on the first day.
Have you had to change any other aspects of the course to minimize student overload? (other than round procedures that is)

Quote

Studies have found that people tend to revert to their original training in situations of high stress or panic.

That was the strongest argument for TAS as opposed to SOS.
The counter argument went something like "Why have a system that is less safe on a 100% of the students (SOS is simpler to teach) just to make it safer for the .05% who might get gear. A first jumper is more likely to pull the wrong handle than someone with an A lisence"
(We have TAS with fly away loops I'm just criticizing the argument not the position

Quote

Do you want them to revert to trying to land their future square reserve like a round, or their student square like a round since they got two different instructions and only remember one?

I think that's a bit of a leap. I've never (in 10000-11000 students) had a student crash because they thought it was a round or forgot that you should flare a square. Although people do react differently under stress, I doubt that people not flaring square reserves is a problem, It's all they've been jumping! They have had a good section of their FJC talking about it and unless it's their first jump, they've probably flown one a few times

In '94 I taught the first jump course at a school that had square reserves in half their student gear (they had just started crossing over). The chief Instructor had me teach the FJs as if all the gear had rounds. Although I realize that 3 yrs and about 3000 students at this DZ gave a small sample size, no one had a problem figuring out what to do under the reserve. By the time they were landing, the stress was on a down curve and they could focus.

Quote

Its the same reason we don't train on front mount reserves, SOS, ripcord or anything else not found on a normal sport rig. Its better to train them properly once in the beginning then have to retrain them for every new piece of gear later.

I think you make a good point if you are saying that consistency is the best training tool of all. I'm behind that 100%

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[obelixtim 100]

An hour is about right......I don't rush or neglect any checks or procedures.....but I don't fart about either....job to be done, do it.....I've got better things to do than spend hours on a reserve job....its not that exciting.....

Pedantic doesn't equate with efficieny....or a "safer" pack job.........I know what I'm doing.......

I, and I'll speak for a lot of "we's" if I may....prefer squares because yes, we "like them", and because we've done the considered thinking about the pros and cons of both types, and made our decisions for sound reasons.......

I defy you to find anyone who has made the change to squares to say it was a bad decision and they would change back to roundies.....

My static line training was a lot easier....and takes about 4 hours as opposed to around 7 or 8 hours...a big saving in time......but the training was simpler, more efficient and a lot better quality......and there was more time for jumping........

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[teason 0]

Quote

Pedantic doesn't equate with efficieny....or a "safer" pack job.........I know what I'm doing.......

oops, you're right, I implied otherwise. I've seen riggers just slam them together in a half hour.
It was unfair of me to assume that's what you do and you that you don't give due dilegence.
sorry

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[riggerrob 558]

Round versus square?

I burnt out on this debate a decade ago, mainly from dealing with warbird pilots.
They cling to the old notion that rounds are "safer" because even the brain dead can land them without training. Mind you, their definition of a good landing involves a broken ankle or hanging in trees on a mountain side at sunset.
The confusion in most of our conversations was caused by skydivers' higher standard for a "good landing." Skydivers define a "good landing" as one you can walk away from.
If you want to walk away from landing a round canopy, the ground school takes longer. It takes far longer to teach the PLFs, that are essential if you want to walk away from a round landing.
For example, it took the Canadian Army two weeks to pound PLFs into me. Either the sadists at the Canadian Airborne Center (Edmonton) enjoyed prolonging the agony or I am was not very bright ?????
On the other hand, your average pilot should grasp the basics of landing a square parachute in less than an hour.
In conclusion, I argue that round canopies require MORE ground school.

[PhreeZone 15]

>Have you had to change any other aspects of the course to minimize student overload? (other than round procedures that is)

From the few classes I taught it was easier since we did'nt have to spend more time on round procedures, did'nt have to spend 30 minutes doing PLF's and did'nt have to teach them the finer points of what to do under a round with less controlability. I'm yet to see a student get overloaded by double out procedues in the 5 years at the DZ, and there have been a few incidents of double out.

Even nicer was that the spot became slightly less critical, anyone could talk the student down since all the ground crew were used to squares but not many were used to rounds, and the riggers liked being able to used any rig for student jumps. Its getting harder to find piggyback rigs that are set up for round reserves. This ment the DZ could shop around for better deals when they replaced all the student gear 2 years ago then being locked into the remaining 2 or 3 manufactors. Using the same rig for AFF as what one could use for IAD is nice too. I would hate to have an AFF student dump their round reserve at 8000 feet. Who knows where they are coming down with that, but with a square they can fly into the uppers to hold more into the wind and not be blown as far away.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[teason 0]

Quote

I burnt out on this debate a decade ago, mainly from dealing with warbird pilots.
They cling to the old notion that rounds are "safer" because even the brain dead can land them without training. Mind you, their definition of a good landing involves a broken ankle or hanging in trees on a mountain side at sunset.

I've always wondered why pilots tend to have rounds in their gear, If they can't figure out how the flare works on a wing, they probably shouldn't be flying!

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[billvon 2,400]

>I've always wondered why pilots tend to have rounds in their gear . . .

Probably the same reason most jumpers don't have crossbracing. It's more expensive, it doesn't do you much good unless you have the experience to use it, and it's not that common.

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

I've always wondered why pilots tend to have rounds in their gear, If they can't figure out how the flare works on a wing, they probably shouldn't be flying!
Wink

They just dont want to jump :). In this case it does not really matter what they have. And for this reason they would pick the cheaper one :).

[teason 0]

It was kinda a touge in cheek question.

Whenever we have a jump pilot take the FJC, we'll ride him mercilessly if he screws up the flare.
We'll usually say something like "That's why we get out before you land"
Aftre that we call him Captain crash until he goes up again and does it right!

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[riggerrob 558]

Quote

Its the same reason we don't train on front mount reserves, SOS, ripcord or anything else not found on a normal sport rig. Its better to train them properly once in the beginning then have to retrain them for every new piece of gear later.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Good point!
How many of you remember the 1970s and 1980s when students did their first static-line jump on military surplus rounds, then did their first freefall with a main ripcord, then did a few hundred jumps on a Para-Commander before converting to a piggyback containing a square main but with an old round reserve? ... and every rig had handles in different places!
Argh!
No wonder people got confused and died when they pulled the wrong handles, or pulled handles out of sequence, etc.
The best thing the parachute industry did was standardize handles.

[mikeat10500 9]

From Blinc Magazine...the truth re: round reserves...


Hey,

Does anybody know about rounds (and their suitability for BASE)? Sadly, I'm a young 'un, so I have exactly zero experience with rounds.

Basically, my question is this:

I have a old PD235 that I wouldn't mind dunking. Is there any reason that I'd want to jump a round instead of the square for an intentional water jump?

The only reason I can see is that if there is a big object, an offheading wouldn't be as likely to result in a strike, since a round (presumably) wouldn't drive as hard.

But what about these things:

1) Do rounds open faster/slower than squares? Hence making them more/less suitable for super low objects (into water).

2) Do rounds dry faster than squares?

3) Are rounds more durable than squares for super abuse?

4) Is it easier or harder to fish a round out of the drink?

I know that some of you guys jumped rounds, and that it's something of a lost art. Can anyone help me out?

Thanks,

--Tom Aiello


--Tom Aiello

428, "Round is Sound . . ."
In response to Reply # 0


>Is there any reason that I'd want to jump a round instead of the square for an intentional water jump?

Turn the question around and it is easier to answer.

Is there any reason I'd want to jump a square instead of a round for an intentional water jump?

Answer, no.

The only reason to ever jump a square (except for the fact they set you down softer on land) is when you must cover some distance, or be able to maneuver for landing. That's usually not the case on a water jump.

>Do rounds open faster/slower than squares?

It depends on what type of round. Round reserves are a better choice for BASE than round mains as they are generally cleaner by design.

Early round reserves, the pre-F-111 ones, like the Pioneer Tri-Con, Strong 26-foot Lopo or early Preserves were bullet proof, at least at subterminal speeds, but these do take longer to open (part of their charm) because of longer suspension lines and a longer overall length from connector link to apex.

The newer round reserves like the Super 22, the K Series, and the Phantoms are lighter, have shorter lines, and smaller diameters. These will generally open a bit faster.

In either case, a retainer (rubber) band is generally placed around the apex just below the vent. This aids a bit with speeding up inflation time at low airspeeds.

>Do rounds dry faster than squares?

Yes, the air circulates better as a round is basically a single surface. Also, the older ones can better take the abuse of the "shake and bake" method of drying. (You and a buddy waving the canopy up and down in direct sunlight).

>Are rounds more durable than squares for super abuse?

Again, the older ones are, but the newer ones would be the same as your square. Parachutes are delicate by nature after all.

Rounds are also easier to pack (if you already know how) and they are more worry free than a square when used over water at low altitude as they have no inherent line-over mode. This is caused by the fact they aren't going fast enough to have much of a secondary opening shock or rebound.

There are no toggles to mess with as most jumpers will take the control lines completely off the canopy (makes it more dependable). You can use the rear risers to turn. And nevermind, what some say, these rounds have a 3-5 mile an hour foward speed and can be quite manuverable in the right hands.

Rounds can be had easily, just check with any of your older skydiving buddies, or if you want new, we manufacture a 19-foot round just for BASE water jumping called the H2o.

Jumping rounds also means a modification to your BASE rig. Since rounds are free packed you need somewhere to stow the lines. You'll need some Type 3 tape sewn into the container for retainer bands, and that's where the lines are stowed.

Most rounds that are being skydived are diaper deployed, don't use this feature for BASE jumping, just remove the diaper altogether.

Rounds are fun, go have some . . .

Nick
BR

-----------------------------------
Mike Wheadon B-3715,HEMP#1
Higher Expectations for Modern Parachutists.

[mikeat10500 9]

Quote

My DZ took the approach that people are smart enough to land a reserve just like their main. Also taught is the procedures for a 2 out situation with a square main...

So what is the "procedures for a 2 out situation"?

===================================
Re: [Zoter] Langar , UK Incidents..?

The 2 out was rather nasty but ended up ok - no injury...Both were sat nicely in a stack, then transitioned into a side by side and then into a downplane. Kept going between the side by side and the downplane. Was in a downplane at ~40 feet then went back into the side by side for landing.

-----------------------------------
Mike Wheadon B-3715,HEMP#1
Higher Expectations for Modern Parachutists.

[obelixtim 100]

I'm reading a lot of misconceived ideas here....

"....Rounds have no inherent line over mode....."

Where did you get that from???....

Lineovers are about the most common form of malfunction you can get on a round...if you understand how they inflate you'll know why that is...

Actually, its a square that has no inherent line over mode......despite the number of posts you see where people claim to have had a line over....what in fact you have in these "lineovers" is nothing more than a pressure knot, which pinches the canopy in making it look like a lineover....if you know how a lineover occurs...it can't happen on a square like it does on a roundie because the openings are totally dissimilar....

When a roundie has a lineover it almost always suffers damage, most of this is friction burns...caused by the fabic passing thru the lines at high speed....I've seen a roundie cut almost in half by a lineover...

I had a terminal opening on a roundie as a student which destroyed the canopy...over 100 holes in it....fortunatly the canopy went all the way thru the lines and was completely inverted, and I landed OK...didn't realise what had happened until we checked the canopy later.....

If a square ever really had a lineover you would find that it would probably saw it in half...there would certainly be major damage....

"Lineovers" on squares are a myth.... on roundies they are a reality.....

And let me assure you roundies at terminal open fast.....real nutcrackers....a square has a freebag and slider to make the opening comfortable......but still fast....

A diaper makes no difference to to the opening speed of a roundie....again, if you understand how one opens you would know why that is....a diaper is specifically designed to prevent lineovers.....

The rubber band on the apex of a square again has no influence on the opening speed of the reserve...

Ultimately if you pull the handle at 200 feet or less at terminal, you are now relying totally on luck to survive, whichever canopy you have....don't go there....one day you'll walk, next day you'll bounce....

Subterminal base jump....probably a hand deployed roundie is your best bet......go and find an old rigger and ask exactly what that is.....

Into water....jump whatever you like....but DON'T dry your reserve in the sun.....hang it up in your basement/garage...give it a couple of days to dry out thoroughly......

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[dragon2 0]

So what do you call half a linegroup over 1 1/2 cells on a Sabre, then?!
I had it on tape but that tape has dissappeared . Freezeframe showed that there were a number of lines definately going the wrong way (not the steering lines btw).

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[PhreeZone 15]

>"Lineovers" on squares are a myth....

Thats odd, we had tandem with a line over this weekend at the DZ. Could easly see the lines over the nose on the video. We've had a few canopies that have line burn marks in the topskin of the canopy, I guess those were caused by pressure knots though huh?

Talk to Tom Aiello about the subterminal BASE jumps, I think they have proven that a Square with out a slider opens faster then a round.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[riggerrob 558]

Quote

I'm reading a lot of misconceived ideas here....

"....Rounds have no inherent line over mode....."

Where did you get that from???....

Lineovers are about the most common form of malfunction you can get on a round...if you understand how they inflate you'll know why that is...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

If you want to be specific, "line overs" are rare on round canopies. That is a misnomer that we did not understand until the 1980s. HOWEVER, "partial inversions" occurr in something like 5% of round deployments. During an iversion type malfunction, part of the skirt blows under the other side and tries to inflate, outside, on the oposite side of the canopy. Poynter published some good diagrams of this in Volume 2.
In my 70-odd jumps with round canopies, I totally inverted one Canadian Army Military Freefall canopy and partially inverted a German Army, static-line T-10 (pre-anti-inversion net). It was amusing hanging under the freefall canopy, staring at the pilot chute and sleeve inside the canopy, pulling left to turn right and vice versa. The T-10 cleared itself.
I landed both canopies okay, but the dozens of small holes rendered them un-economical to repair.

Line overs do occur on square canopies, but they are limited to the sloppiest of packers or low speed BASE deployments. The sloppiest of skydiving PRO packers drag their steering lines around to the front of their canopies. I am ashamed to admit that I have packed that sloppily three times.
BASE jumpers have documented many (no slider) low speed deployments when the tail inflates before the nose and tries to surge forward. Without a slider - to limit lines wandering - this can get pretty confusing and cause the occassional steering line over.
Two solutions come to mind: sliders and tail gates.
Tail gates are short pieces of suspension lines attached to center C lines and rubber bands wrapped around some D and all of the steering lines to keep steering lines center rear throughout deployment.

• Quote

[mikeat10500 9]

Quote

I'm reading a lot of misconceived ideas here....

"....Rounds have no inherent line over mode....."

Where did you get that from???....

From Blinc Magazine? Some of this stuff is news to me too!

Quote

Lineovers are about the most common form of malfunction you can get on a round...if you understand how they inflate you'll know why that is...

Understand and agree.

Quote

Actually, its a square that has no inherent line over mode......

It's not inherent...but can be packed in or induced on opening.

Quote

When a roundie has a lineover it almost always suffers damage, most of this is friction burns...caused by the fabic passing thru the lines at high speed....I've seen a roundie cut almost in half by a lineover...

I saw a lineover on a round reserve(mae west)....the jumper worked it off...no damage to the reserve. I believe in a lot of cases the reserve would be damaged...better it than me!

Quote

I had a terminal opening on a roundie as a student which destroyed the canopy...over 100 holes in it....fortunatly the canopy went all the way thru the lines and was completely inverted, and I landed OK...didn't realise what had happened until we checked the canopy later.....

I got 2 terminal openings on my lopo 26(original)...only hole was in the apex...I landed OK.
I love that big old jellyfish.

Quote

If a square ever really had a lineover you would find that it would probably saw it in half...there would certainly be major damage....

Then...let us hope it is a main so it can be cutaway before causing damage.

Quote

"Lineovers" on squares are a myth.... on roundies they are a reality.....

You can land and walk away from a lineover on a round most of the time...even with canopy damage.
Let's hope you are correct about SLM(Square Lineover Myth).

-----------------------------------
Mike Wheadon B-3715,HEMP#1
Higher Expectations for Modern Parachutists.

[billvon 2,400]

> "Lineovers" on squares are a myth....

I have half a dozen pictures of true lineovers on squares. I use one in my first jump course. I also have a picture of a tension knot that I use for comparison.

[obelixtim 100]

Jeez.....the "myth" word sure sparked everyone up.....as I knew it would.......but I'm sticking to my guns on this one....

I'm talking about the "inherent" word.....

Perhaps my post wasn't clear enough......I was talking about deployment mals......and how a square does not deploy or inflate anything like a roundie......and I would suggest a lineover could not happen on a PROPERLY packed square canopy.....

Any fool can stuff a bunch of fabric thru a set of lines while packing......thats called a PACKING mal.....

...I know this.....because they come crying to me to repack their reserve for the next load......

The proper term for a lineover on a roundie is a blown periphery.......and usually comes from bad/unstable body position during deployment..........

You can easily deal with a lineover on a roundie....hook knife.....cut the offender off at the connector link.......

I've seen a few turn into very small fast helicopters, I certainly wouldn't like to ride one into the ground.....if you walked away from one I'd say you were having an extremely lucky day!!...

Now quit blocking up my inbox!!!....:)....OK...

My computer beat me at chess, It was no match for me at kickboxing....

[billvon 2,400]

>and I would suggest a lineover could not happen on a PROPERLY packed
>square canopy.....

I guess that depends on your definition of "properly packed." I've seen lineovers packed by people with 3000+ jumps, with 1000+ packjobs on the same canopy.

Also, there are a lot of ways to encourage/discourage lineovers. Some canopies have incredibly long brake lines, or have brake lines that are not stowed for deployment. These lines go considerably past the nose, and during inflation, the nose is well below the tail attachement points. During a bizarre opening, if the nose surges at the tail (picture an unmodified stack pack opening like it was packed) I can see the potential for a lineover.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

And let me assure you roundies at terminal open fast.....real nutcrackers....a square has a freebag and slider to make the opening comfortable......but still fast....

Opening speed is determined by "fill time" and what, if any, method is used to reef or meter the deployment. A large round with light load with open slower than a small ram air with a heavy load all thing being equal. But then you could use a PC reefed slider and the deployment speed would determine opening speed. The freebag has nothing to do with the opening speed, it is there to stage the deployment.
Staging make it deploy in an orderly manner and metering/reefing controls how fast it inflates. Deployment and inflate/opening are two separate things.
Yes you can have a line over on a ram air. Before the advent of Pro packing it was almost unheard of. Pro packing make it easy to get the lines out of position, requires close attention.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals