Crossfire Incident Today

[Andrew 0]

I have a crossfire 149 with one of the affected serial numbers. I load it at about 1.6 and generally land using a long carving front riser turn. I have had no problems with it as of yet however there have been several incidents at my home DZ. Many of these problems have been due to the wrong line set attached. The bad characteristics of this canopy seem to show up either during radical front riser turns (wrong line set) or flying in or near dense clouds (possibly due to a down draft??). I emailed Icarus recently about my experience and have not heard back from them.
Blue Ones....

[Designer 0]

I just got my first look at the Vengeance.The only real difference between my jedei swept-wing and the vengeance was how the "Airlocks" were attached(sewn) to the end cell.(Quick Look)The other change was that the top of the "Airlock" was angled more horizontal to the top skin(Underside) probably to Direct more air over more surface area.Which makes good sense now that I think about it.Now,more to the orginal choice you made.From what I,ve heard & Know about R&D, there seems to have been testing left undone on the Crossfire.Not that I know for sure or am I slamming anybody who would Know(cover my ass).First, R&D is "Expensive" and second, "Time Consuming".Trying to cheat around those 2 facts invites disaster!You can accelerate the process by doing as much or more testing than other companies in the same relative time frame(OR Faster)but,must be carefull to not let the basic goals or procedure suffer by not crossing all the T,s and dotting all the I,s.Most of the changes made in testing a parachute are extremely subtle and would go unnoticed by the casual pilot.What is enough testing?I heard a casual pilot saying that he would need to make a 100 jumps on a canopy to make a proper evaluation.(In most cases he is right!)When time and lots of money are involved I,ve learned that you aren,t going to learn that much more than you already Know after just 25 jumps!(Must make the best use of those 25 jumps)Guess,that,s why professional test pilots exsist.Besides,those other 75 jumps can be used to test 3 other small changes.Rob.

[flyhi 24]

No matter what the reason, am I glad I am not trying to sell a used Crossfire? Yes.
Would I buy a used Crossfire? No
Would I buy a new Crossfire? No.
Would I buy any Icarus Canopy? No, but if anyone wants to send me a free VX 99, yellow with purple cross-braces, I'll gladly take it. Maybe I'd pay the shipping too.
flyhi

[SBS 0]

That allegation regarding R&D is pretty serious, and I would not, personally, post anything like that without being 110% confident in that statement, which you obviously are not (otherwise you would not make the statement about covering your ass). If there are really issues with their R&D being negligent, then it need be said, but if you are not positive, and do not have proof that that is the case, I would not, personally, make a statement like that based on hearsay.
I would recommend speaking to Icarus directly, and request some documentation, if they would be willing to share it. I think that you will find that their R&D is one of, if not THE, most extensive in the business. Previously, they have stopped short of mismanufacturing their product, just to see how it flies, but from what I sounds like, they will be doing just that in the future on a number of canopies.
These are exacty the types of statements that we need to stay away from until we are sure of what is going on, and it is exactly the reason for my original post.
Can we PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, state facts OR opinion? If it is a fact, state it as such, and back it up....if it is an opinion, state it as such, and share why it is you feel that way....The rumor mills that we create in life are bad enough, without everyone stating opinion as fact.
Blue Skies,
Steve

[skymedic 0]

as steve becomes the moderator around here.....
and the flames are flying
Marc
Because I fly, I envy no man on earth

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

This is the part that has baffled me. The entire underside of the canopy has suspension lines loaded in tension while it is in flight. For the left side of the canopy to cross beneath the underside to touch the second or third cell from the right side means that the suspension lines were no longer in tension, or else they would prevent this from happening.

As I said in the original post, I did not actually see what the canopy did - looking up at the canopy was the last thing on my mind - this is what I was told by witnesses..

Quote

This would indicate a major stall condition where all lift was gone, and the jumper was falling, not flying.

Falling pretty well explains what I felt, but I don't know if the canopy was completely stalled or not.. On the video from my POV, after I hit the ground(at a 45degree angle to the left), there are a few frames on the video that we were able to catch the canopy.. It appeared to be inflated, but to me looked like there were a couple parts of the canopy(part of the left 2 outer cells and the front half of the 4th cell in from the left) that were not very well pressurized.. This could have been because the majority of the load had just been removed from the canopy when I hit the ground, and the right side was not visible for a couple seconds - and by then the lines were slack..
Hopefully Icarus gets some conclusive data from the tests on my canopy..
Mike

[Aviatrr 0]

Quote

I have a crossfire 149 with one of the affected serial numbers. I load it at about 1.6 and generally land using a long carving front riser turn. I have had no problems with it as of yet however there have been several incidents at my home DZ.

According to Simon at Icarus, during test jumps the problem manifested itself primarily during long front riser carves(roughly 270+ degrees), and not during abrupt maneuvers..
The bad characteristics of this canopy seem to show up either during radical front riser turns (wrong line set) or flying in or near dense clouds (possibly due to a down draft??).
All bets are off when you're flying in, or very close to, clouds.. All kinds of things can happen there - updrafts, downdrafts, rotors, etc..

Quote

I emailed Icarus recently about my experience and have not heard back from them.

It seems that the email is not check very often, or there is just such a massive volume that they can't reply very quickly.. If you think your experience would benefit their testing, call Simon at the number listed on their website in Sebastian, FL..
Mike

[rmsmith 1]

>>This is the part that has baffled me. The entire underside
>>of the canopy has suspension lines loaded in tension while
>>it is in flight. For the left side of the canopy to cross
>>beneath the underside to touch the second or third cell
>>from the right side means that the suspension lines were
>>no longer in tension, or else they would prevent this from
>>happening.
>
>As I said in the original post, I did not actually see what the
>canopy did - looking up at the canopy was the last thing
>on my mind - this is what I was told by witnesses..
I certainly agree with the numerous witnesses.
>>This would indicate a major stall condition where all lift
>>was gone, and the jumper was falling, not flying.
>
>Falling pretty well explains what I felt, but I don't know if
>the canopy was completely stalled or not.. On the video
>from my POV, after I hit the ground(at a 45degree angle to
>the left), there are a few frames on the video that we were
>able to catch the canopy.. It appeared to be inflated, but to
>me looked like there were a couple parts of the canopy(part
>of the left 2 outer cells and the front half of the 4th cell in
>from the left) that were not very well pressurized.. This could
>have been because the majority of the load had just been
>removed from the canopy when I hit the ground, and the
>right side was not visible for a couple seconds - and by then
>the lines were slack..
If you and the canopy are moving downward, but the surrounding air is not then it stands to reason that your canopy will inflate. However, if the surrounding air is also moving downward then your canopy wouldn't inflate, and the end cell crossing beneath your canopy would be possible.
Continuing with this logic, an atmospheric condition contributed greatly to this incident.