Direct Line Attachment vs. Flares

[HPC 7]

I'd like to hear assessments from people (obviously geared to those of you who've been in the sport for a long time) who have had the opportunity to jump canopies from Django Enterprises and Glide Path/Flight Concepts.
More specifically, from those who have jumped the identical canopies except for the differing line attachment methods. I'm trying to determine if there was an improvement or degradation in canopy performance as a result of the forced change, such as openings, forward speed, glide ratio, turning, stability, landings, pack volume, strength, etc. Below I've listed the Django direct line attachment canopies and their flared Glide Path (later Flight Concepts) successors.

Pegasus-->Fury
LR-288-->Manta
Firefly-->Firelite
Dragonfly-->Raider
Bandit-->Wildfire

Correct me if I've made any errors.

Thanks.

What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.

[jonstark 8]

You’re talking ancient history here.

Anecdotally, there seemed to be some improvement in the “cleanliness” of the airfoils after Django was forced to change their attachment method. I doubt there was ever any real testing performed though. My experience is hundreds of jumps on both the Firefly and Firelite canopies. I recall noticing little difference between the two.

[HPC 7]

Quote

You’re talking ancient history here.

I understand that both canopy product lines are obsolete; however, should that preclude my asking a question just for the sake of satisfying curiosity?
It was something that I always had wondered about.

I remember reading a post months ago in which the poster's experience was the opposite of yours - he felt the Fury's performance was inferior to its predecessor (Pegasus) as a result of the change.

What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.

[jonstark 8]

My point exactly...

Anecdotes are not data

[gowlerk 1,903]

I can't imagine that any real data exists to answer that question one way or another. But I think that the fact the patent must be long expired and as far as I know no one has since adopted flares into any current design tells me that they are not advantageous.

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

Hi Jon,

Quote

Django was forced to change their attachment method

It was not so much a 'forced to change' as it was the lawsuit that Django lost. Steve Snyder developed the direct line attachment method & patented it; he had patent attorneys in his family.

Some paid Snyder royalties to use his method, others used some other approach to get around the patent.

Mike Furry 'apparently' felt that the patent would not be enforced in court. He was wrong & lost. As a result of the lawsuit, Django closed their doors the day of the judgement.

His designs rebounded with the small flares to get around the patent.

I 'heard' that during the pre-trial negotiations, Snyder & Furry were only $5.00 apart as to an agreement; and neither would budge any further.

Jerry Baumchen

[HPC 7]

Five dollars apart as a royalty per canopy?

What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.

[HPC 7]

They certainly seem more labor intensive.

What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.

[HPC 7]

The Jalbert 252 accuracy canopy of the era had large flares - do you know if this was to avoid royalties or did it add some measure of stability perhaps more important to accuracy canopies?

What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

Hi HPC,

Quote

royalty per canopy

That is how I understand it.

Jerry Baumchen

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

Hi HPC,

Quote

Jalbert . . . canopy . . . to avoid royalties

You have things backwards.

Snyder's Direct Attachment Method was to avoid Jalbert's patent using flares.

Jerry Baumchen

[HPC 7]

If true it would seem to have been a bad decision at the time. Django canopies were significantly cheaper than Para-Flite's at the time, so agreeing and marking up canopy prices to compensate would have seemed the more business-prudent decision. I wonder if Mike would agree. Probably something he'd rather not talk about.

What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.

[HPC 7]

Learn something new all the time.

What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.

[HPC 7]

So do you know if Glide Path then had to pay Jalbert royalties for the flare method or had that patent already expired?

What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.

[accumack 13]

I have more information as i worked for Para-Flite at the time. I'm not willing to discuss it on a forum.

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

Hi HPC,

Quote

do you know if Glide Path then had to pay Jalbert royalties

I know nothing about that.

However, the flares on the Glide Path canopies were a significant design differential from the flares on a Jalbert canopy.

The Jalbert flares were an extension ( same piece ) of the rib fabric. The Glide Path flares were add-ons to the bottom skin.

Jerry Baumchen

[HPC 7]

Thanks for the clarification.
Seems the Jalbert design would be the better of the two.

What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.

[Bob_Church 7]

accumack

I have more information as i worked for Para-Flite at the time. I'm not willing to discuss it on a forum.

I really miss Para-flite. The happiest I've ever been with a canopy was with my Cruise-Lite.

[HPC 7]

When I first started jumping Cruisairs were as common at the DZ as Boeing 727s were at O'Hare. I miss the three-holers too.

What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.

[keithbar 1]

And no one got killed under a good canopy. Everyone was jumping 200+ square feet canopies you might get a broken leg but you weren't going to kill yourself once it opened

i have on occasion been accused of pulling low . My response. Naw I wasn't low I'm just such a big guy I look closer than I really am .

[Unstable 8]

Quote

And no one got killed under a good canopy. Everyone was jumping 200+ square feet canopies you might get a broken leg but you weren't going to kill yourself once it opened

Risk Homeostasis. Can't let those fatalities per year move from that 25-30 mark.

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

[HPC 7]

Yeah, Bill Booth nailed that one right on the head.

What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.

[RiggerLee 61]

Just got back into town and was catching up when I saw this thread.

As to it being out dated. I was base jumping my Pegasus on the trip.

I think their is more to it then just direct vs flair. Some of the early canopies had a vertical tape rather then v reinforcing the rib or no tape at all. Strong actually tried cutting ribs on the bias and sewing a vertical tape to it allowing the fibers to convey the load to that tape.

So their were big changes to the quality of the airfoil as canopies evolved. A good example was the Raven. One of the big changes from the Raven to the Super Raven was the change from one vertical tape to a V. They also made some panel changes. But there is a notable difference in performance.

If you look down on them from above the old airfoil is much bumpier then the later one.

Dijango/glide path/flight concepts went through similar changes. The Peg had one vertical tape. Early glide path flares were just attached to the bottom and could pull lose. Later glide path or flight concepts canopies, I don't recall when they made the change, The flare is sewn onto the bottom of the rib but that tape is continuous. It forms a continuous V on the rib and comes down and makes the attachment point. Later they played with a shorter flair with a wider tape angle. But the bottom line is that, like other companies, as they got better support on their rib their air foils became smoother. And the canopies flew better.

Lee

Lee
[email protected]
www.velocitysportswear.com

[HPC 7]

Thanks for your detailed reply. Nice to hear that a Pegasus is still giving good service.

What's right isn't always popular and what's popular isn't always right.

[accumack 13]

Some of Para-Flite's Strato Flyers had only 1 vertical tape prior to D'jango. During the trial Snyder presented the single vertical tape as part of the copying and patent infringement case.