Andybilly 0 #1 August 9, 2007 What would you consider a bad reason for downsizing and what would you consider a well reasoned argument for downsizing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
piisfish 136 #2 August 9, 2007 good reasons : -it impresses the chicks -you then have a smaller/lighter/cool looking rig bad reasons : -Earth flies faster at youscissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohanW 0 #3 August 9, 2007 - it packs easier - it actually flies into the wind - you can land the smaller canopy better Good and bad are left as an exercise for the jumper. Ask your instructor. Canopy flying is fun! Flying smaller canopies is more fun Just don't overdo it. Johan. I am. I think. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dmetz 0 #4 August 9, 2007 Good reason (only one): you're no longer satistfied with your current canopy because you've mastered everything possible on it, and have flown it to the edge of it's designed capabilities and still want more...and, you and those around you whose opinion matters feel comfortable with your ability to make the next step down. Bad reason: anything else._________________________________________ "If a vegetarian eats vegetables, what does a humanitarian eat?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
popsjumper 2 #5 August 9, 2007 Quote...- you can land the smaller canopy better major fallacy PD has a good article by Scott Miller at: http://www.performancedesigns.com/docs/choosing1.pdf There's a part 2 also.My reality and yours are quite different. I think we're all Bozos on this bus. Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 644 #6 August 9, 2007 Here is the best review of downsizing I have seen to date. Thanks billvon! It prompted me to start trying some different things under canopy I hadn't considered before reading...and it thereby helped improve some skillz! Landing on rear risers also prompted some very informative discussion at the dz as well... Downsizing Checklist Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DougH 270 #7 August 9, 2007 Because all the cool kids are doing it. "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dharma1976 0 #8 August 9, 2007 the only reason I see for downsizing is that you have ragged out every ounce of performance on your current wing of choice Davehttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Glitch 0 #9 August 9, 2007 Good reasons: You want to be a member of the ultra-elite Titanium club, and you can't do that without having the metal under your skin and bolted to bone... You need an extended break from the sport: perfect opportunity to join the aforementioned club... It's too hard to pack a larger parachute... You really need the attention, and there's no better place to get attention and be talked about than on DZ.com... It's too difficult to handle a larger wing and it makes it impossible to swoop... Bigger is not always better: except with paychecks, boobies, and bottles. Bad reasons: Well...there really isn't any bad reasons to downsize. Nobody on this site knows what the fuck their talking about anyways. There's an unspoken conspiracy where those of us who have survived do our best to keep those of you with less experience totally clueless to the realities of this sport. It's not that we don't like you (even though we prolly don't), it's just that it makes it easier for us to maintain our 'Godlike' and 'Manly' status and image to all the whuffos. Really... Randomly f'n thingies up since before I was born... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
squirrel 0 #10 August 9, 2007 i guess i am not very cool...i still have my spectre 170, that i purchased at jump 15. ________________________________ Where is Darwin when you need him? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,476 #11 August 9, 2007 >- it packs easier I haven't found this to be true overall. It doesn't take me any more time to pack our Silhouette 150 than my Nitro 108 (both of which are middle aged.) It _does_ take me longer to pack my Pilot 150 but that's mainly because it's newer. >- you can land the smaller canopy better This one doesn't make much sense. If you can't land a large canopy, in general landings under a small canopy will be much worse. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Fast 0 #12 August 9, 2007 QuoteWhat would you consider a bad reason for downsizing and what would you consider a well reasoned argument for downsizing? I am currently downsizing because I want something that is more aggressive and swoops farther.~D Where troubles melt like lemon drops Away above the chimney tops That's where you'll find me. Swooping is taking one last poke at the bear before escaping it's cave - davelepka Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #13 August 9, 2007 Quotei guess i am not very cool...i still have my spectre 170 I know I am NOT cool. I jump a Spectre 150 and it is a great all around canopy and I also jump a JXV 87 for some serious adrenaline pumping swooping action. No I am NOT cool for other reasons. But my lack of coolness has nothing to do with the canopies I fly. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VTmotoMike08 0 #14 August 9, 2007 Quote Bigger is not always better: except with paychecks, boobies, and bottles. Thanks, that is gonna be my new sig line Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Glitch 0 #15 August 9, 2007 Just make sure ya quote me! Randomly f'n thingies up since before I was born... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #16 August 9, 2007 Quote>- it packs easier I haven't found this to be true overall. It doesn't take me any more time to pack our Silhouette 150 than my Nitro 108... Yes, the number of folds are the same regardless of size. It's just that some folds are a little bigger. And if you're so lazy that you want to downsize to save a few inches of hand movement, then that's a really dumb reason. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #17 August 9, 2007 Quote>- it packs easier I haven't found this to be true overall. It doesn't take me any more time to pack our Silhouette 150 than my Nitro 108 (both of which are middle aged.) It _does_ take me longer to pack my Pilot 150 but that's mainly because it's newer. That's because your choices are a small canopy and a tiny canopy, relative to my frame of reference. As a 6 footer, the 210 is the first one that didn't require doubling up when carrying it off the LZ due to line length, and was significantly easier to deal with than the 230+. For someone with a truly conservative (sub 1.0) wingloading, wind seems like a valid reason to downsize. Shouldn't have to take a canopy that flies backwards at the student limit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dharma1976 0 #18 August 9, 2007 still do the downsizing checklist before downsizing that iwll help you to really wring every bit of performance and non performance out of your current canopy. \ Dhttp://www.skyjunky.com CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Glitch 0 #19 August 10, 2007 QuoteFor someone with a truly conservative (sub 1.0) wingloading, wind seems like a valid reason to downsize. Shouldn't have to take a canopy that flies backwards at the student limit. I'm not an instructor, so add some salt... I have to disagree with wind being a valid reason to downsize. If, a student is backing up under canopy then perhaps the winds are too high for the student to be jumping. I don't believe a student, or anyone for that matter, should downsize just because your going backwards under canopy with some winds. I have, on numerous occassions, flown and landed while flying backwards. If your proficient with your canopy its no big deal (I didn't say 'ideal'; there's a difference). If you can't safely land your canopy if you happen to be losing ground while facing into the wind (being blown backwards by high winds as a front is moving in after a CRW load...for example), then your not getting all the 'performance' out of the canopy and you haven't explored all the envelope of what the canopy can/can't do. You therefore, should probably reconsider the downsizing decision. YMMV.Randomly f'n thingies up since before I was born... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #20 August 10, 2007 QuoteQuoteFor someone with a truly conservative (sub 1.0) wingloading, wind seems like a valid reason to downsize. Shouldn't have to take a canopy that flies backwards at the student limit. I'm not an instructor, so add some salt... I have to disagree with wind being a valid reason to downsize. If, a student is backing up under canopy then perhaps the winds are too high for the student to be jumping. I don't believe a student, or anyone for that matter, should downsize just because your going backwards under canopy with some winds. I'm not talking about students. They have a clear limit, and they should be on these bigger canopies for lots of reasons. But 16mph is not too high for licensed jumpers. If you can't deal with that wind speed, you'd write off places like Byron and Monterey Bay as the winds exceed that as a rule. (Byron has a waiver so the students can go slightly higher than the 15 limit) You'd never be able to get all the performance out of your canopy because you'd only have a window of time to do 1 or 2 jumps a visit. That said, it doesn't take that much canopy to eliminate the wind as a reason. My 210 loaded in the 1.1-1.2 range will penetrate greater wind than I'm interested in jumping - 22 or 23mph at least. So it wouldn't be a good reason to justify a move to 1.3. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
