Question About WLing

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

I guess they agreed on world standard of sizing

But they didn't.

Dave

[format 0]

They didn't?
So there's possibility that we're using incorrect referrence in choosing canopy/WL?

It's like 10 minutes of measuring Xs and Ys of lower fabric. (without stabilizers)
Inputing data in.. say ACAD software would give you precise 3D surface of which sqft-area is auto-presented.

Can't think of what I missed (I usually do)

What goes around, comes later.

[gearless_chris 1]

Quote

They didn't?
So there's possibility that we're using incorrect referrence in choosing canopy/WL?

It's like 10 minutes of measuring Xs and Ys of lower fabric. (without stabilizers)
Inputing data in.. say ACAD software would give you precise 3D surface of which sqft-area is auto-presented.

Can't think of what I missed (I usually do)

I think the problem is that some people argue about whether to count the top skin overhang, and how much of it to count if you do.

"If it wasn't easy stupid people couldn't do it", Duane.

My momma said I could be anything I wanted when I grew up, so I became an a$$hole.

[popsjumper 2]

I haven't been able to measure mine.





I can't find anybody with square feet.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

Hi format,

***preapproved manufacturer's


What is this term you speak of?

JerryBaumchen

[pilotdave 0]

Quote

They didn't?
So there's possibility that we're using incorrect referrence in choosing canopy/WL?

It's like 10 minutes of measuring Xs and Ys of lower fabric. (without stabilizers)
Inputing data in.. say ACAD software would give you precise 3D surface of which sqft-area is auto-presented.

Can't think of what I missed (I usually do)

There are standard techniques for calculating a canopy's area. You don't need to invent one. But the thing is that there are more than one and different manufacturers use different techniques. So then you get a lot of "your 135 is actually 139 square feet." But nobody can define "actually."

But does it really matter?
FYI, how wide is the jumper's chest strap in your 3D CAD model?

Dave

[format 0]

Quote

What is this term you speak of?

"why question preapproved manufacturer's size?"

English isn't my native,
I guess I meant something like "questioning Certified methods", for instance - we get exact amount of whisky in a bottle - nobody complaints..

So "Actual" difference, OVERHANG or overhang, doesn't affect decition safety?

-please don't ask what a "decition safety" means-

_________________
ok Dave, I get it :)

edit:
Let me clear my motive, if I choose to tryout a 139ft canopy, I wouldn't mind if it's "actually" 143
but NO, I wouldn't try it if it's "actually" 135.
So far I rely on label# + jump#

What goes around, comes later.

[billvon 2,400]

>I guess they agreed on world standard of sizing

They really don't. Canopy size can be measured a lot of different ways, and many manufacturers do it slightly differently. Check out the old PIA canopy size/volume document for some examples.

Then you have the issue of purposely incorrect sizing, as the case with the Safire1's. For a while they were sized slightly bigger than they really were because they "flew small." (In other words, a 129 was really 119 square feet when measured by the system they used for all their other canopies.)