goshawk 0 #1 November 17, 2004 Last w/e I was demo jumping the new Rage 97. I was loading this canopy at 1.55 (I have over 900 jumps), and had talked to my canopy coach before test jumping it, regarding the probable characteuristics. He expressed some doubts as to whether the new breed of canopy with the formed nose to keep the wing more rigid (and improve the aerodymamic qualities) was actually as effective as claimed. His belief was that they could react unfavourably to turbulence, the wakes of other canopies etc. I made two uneventful jumps on the Rage and then went to make a third. I found myself a little crowded in the landing pattern as I was tending to catch the canopy ahead of me. I was unable to turn inside this canopy because I was wary of crossing a line of tall trees which produce a fair amount of roll so I flew a little wide and only turned in after the other canopy after it was quite some distance ahead of me- I would estimate at least 100ft if not more. At the point where my canopy intersected the wake of the other the right hand side suddenly and dramaticly collapsed and it fell into a sharp downwards and backwards spiral, throwing in line twists as it went. At this point I was at approximately 300ft AGL. I fought to clear the twist and succeeded but was then left with a canopy that still had most of the cells on the right collapsed and was now spiralling forwards to the right at high speed. I was only able to re-inflate the canopy with some difficulty by pulling on the right control toggle about 3-4 times in succession and managed to get a good canopy above my head by 50ft AGL to come in for an off landing in a ploughed field next to the landing area. I feel that a canopy that reacts in this manner to what must have been a fairly mimimal amount of wake must present safety issues as regards the design characteuristics. I would be interested to hear if anyone else has experienced this type of problem with the Rage? Lou. It is better to be happy for a moment and be burned up with beauty than to live a long time and be bored all the while. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 3 #2 November 17, 2004 What was your altitude compared to the other canopy? Higher, lower on level? SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gus 1 #3 November 17, 2004 Quote feel that a canopy that reacts in this manner to what must have been a fairly mimimal amount of wake must present safety issues as regards the design characteuristics. How do you know what happened has anything to do with the specific design of this canopy? GusOutpatientsOnline.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkymonkeyONE 3 #4 November 17, 2004 QuoteQuote feel that a canopy that reacts in this manner to what must have been a fairly mimimal amount of wake must present safety issues as regards the design characteuristics. How do you know what happened has anything to do with the specific design of this canopy? Gus There are quite a few of those canopies around here and I have never seen one act any differently than any other canopy when flown through wake turbulence or rotors off of trees. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Skyflyer1 0 #5 November 17, 2004 Was that an Flight Concepts Rage, or that other companies R.A.G.E ? (When I read it i thought it was the latter). Jonathan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkydiveMO 0 #6 November 17, 2004 How deep were you in your brakes? Full flight, 1/4 brake, 1/2 brake or more? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JumpRu 14 #7 November 17, 2004 Glad you ok and thanks for the post, i was interested in this design and this is valuable information to think about. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,379 #8 November 17, 2004 >I feel that a canopy that reacts in this manner to what must have been >a fairly mimimal amount of wake must present safety issues as regards > the design characteuristics. That's not such a slam-dunk conclusion. My old PD190 (basic F111 canopy) had the worst collapse of my skydiving career off some rotor turbulence; put me in a wheelchair for a month. My Nova 150 was OK in similar turbulence a few years later. Does that mean a Nova is a safer design than the PD190? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 3 #9 November 17, 2004 Hellow, Goshawk. You still there? SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goshawk 0 #10 November 17, 2004 Thank all of you for your comments. In reply. my best estimate was that I was approximately on a level with the leading canopy when the incident occured. I was not on brakes at all at the time but was in the process of making a flat 90 degree turn with just a small input on the right toggle. I would not immeadiately have considered a design flaw had it not been for the disscussion I had with my coach (Chris Lynch) prior to jumping the canopy in regard to this being a possible problem with canopies with formed nose- i.e. poor reaction to turbulence and reluctance to re-inflate once collapsed. I do agree that sometimes a problem can simply occur in an individual canopy, but think that when a relatively new design seems to have a question mark over some aspect of its performance it is worth discussing in this type of forum. I myself have wondered if the collapse might have been avoided if I had flown the turn more aggressively instead of making a slow turn to allow the other canopy to get further ahead. The canopy was by Wings from Paragear. I have frequently jumped a Crossfire 2 which also has a formed nose (although of a different design) without encountering this type of problem. Lou. It is better to be happy for a moment and be burned up with beauty than to live a long time and be bored all the while. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bob.dino 0 #11 November 17, 2004 Quotenew breed of canopy with the formed nose to keep the wing more rigid (and improve the aerodymamic qualities Forgive my ignorance folks, but what exactly is a 'formed nose'? How does it change the shape of the leading edge and does it affect the canopy pressurisation? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #12 November 17, 2004 Every canopy can experience a collapse in turbulence, yes even an airlocked canopy. Folks are better off planning a landing pattern before they go up to have a plan to keep away from obsticles that produce turblence. If landing off, decide high enough to fly to an appropiately safe location for landing. Of course situations will arise where bad situations will happen even with Proper Prior Planning, so prepair for a PLF and fly your ass off.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #13 November 18, 2004 I agree with chuck and aggie dave. Any canopy can do what your's did in turbulance. My opinion is that the flatter faster gliding canpies will be effected by turbulance at or neer the same flight level as a canopy to its front where in the old days we would usually onloy have that problem slightly above and to the rear. I have a few jumps on the Rage (a 130 loaded at 1.46) and have flown behind , above and in front of several other models trying to get film, I have only had 1 complaint, it opens pretty slow. But at my age a slow soft openning may be good for the old back. MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FrogNog 1 #14 November 18, 2004 QuoteQuotenew breed of canopy with the formed nose to keep the wing more rigid (and improve the aerodymamic qualities Forgive my ignorance folks, but what exactly is a 'formed nose'? How does it change the shape of the leading edge and does it affect the canopy pressurisation? By "formed nose" they mean a canopy where the leading edge is not, like most of our ram-air canopies, open holes at the airflow stagnation point. In the case of this particular canopy (*cough*search*cough*), the nose is a continuation of the fabric wing, with a different air inletting design. (Looks sort of like a slit for air in each cell instead of a hole, from what I have seen in the pics.) -=-=-=-=- Pull. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FrogNog 1 #15 November 18, 2004 So, jump 3 on this canopy sucked for you. Glad you didn't get hurt, bummer that things were hairy right down to 50 feet. Are you going to put some more jumps on this canopy to see if it was a fluke? I wouldn't blame you if you decided you were done with it. -=-=-=-=- Pull. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 3 #16 November 18, 2004 QuoteI was approximately on a level with the leading canopy when the incident occured. The turbulence for another canopy will be below that canopy and down wind of it. Unless you were lower and down wind, I doubt if the other canopy caused the problem. jmo SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyspike 0 #17 November 18, 2004 Hi! Iam owner of a Paratec Rage97 with that Ram Air Guiding Engine with now 100jps on it WL about 1.9. I did more than 2000 Jps on elip. canopies. Once i had a collapse of the endcells at the same altitude, i could inflate it like you. it never happened again. I can say in turbulence everything can happen with any canopy - i think i was a bit slow at this time plus turbulence. The RAGE is a canopy that should be flown fast - that is what its designed for. My Velo103 did the same a few month ago!! both canopies are great but the rage opens like nothing else smooth and on heading... Air traffic control is very important - you should spend most of the time under the canopy with checkin around you so you can do your landing as you like - and faaaaaaast... happy that youre ok!! BlueS G."Der Tod stellt aus versorgungsrechtlicher Sicht die stärkste Form der Dienstunfähigkeit dar." (Unterrichtsblätter für die Bundeswehrverwaltung) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
johnny1488 1 #18 November 18, 2004 Here's a pic of one of my Xfire2's that has a formed leading edge (similar to the FC Rage, I believe.) I have never felt any more susceptablility to turbulence than any other canopy I have jumped. I have never jumped the Rage. I contacted FC early this year for a demo but the never followed up on it. Johnny --"This ain't no book club, we're all gonna die!" Mike Rome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
goshawk 0 #19 November 18, 2004 A fair few things to think about but I am inclined to agree that one possible cause was the fact that the canopy was flying too slowly. It is possible that the turbulence was from the line of trees (or even a thermal off the plough) rather than the wake of the other canopy and it may be that I pre-disposed the canopy to react badly by being overcautious about how closely I followed the other one! I have decide against the Rage but not purely as a result of this incident (after all, as some of you have said "shit happens" on all sorts of canopies). I do like a soft and on-heading opening but found it a nuisance to always have to pull on the rear risers to obtain full canopy inflation, I found the slider arrangment unwieldy and, on balance, prefer the XFire2. I jumped this canopy for a couple of days at Rantoul this year and found it gave me fantastic openings without the hassle and also flew happily in all sorts of conditions, coping well with quite severe turbulence. I even prefered it to my Stiletto, to the extent that I have been borrowing one back at my home DZ but it is always worthwhile to explore the options before making a final descision and I don't regret trying the Rage. Even if the biggest rush I got from it was not quite in the way I intended! Lou. It is better to be happy for a moment and be burned up with beauty than to live a long time and be bored all the while. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dragon2 0 #20 November 18, 2004 QuoteQuoteI was approximately on a level with the leading canopy when the incident occured. The turbulence for another canopy will be below that canopy and down wind of it. Unless you were lower and down wind, I doubt if the other canopy caused the problem. jmo Sparky I believe turbulence from a canopy in flight goes up and outward from behind in a cone-ish shape. So if you are on level and really close, you could feel it, if you are higher up you have more chance of feeling the turbulence, but if you are below the canopy you cannot. This is the turbulence that is created by the canopy's own flight. I doubt any downwind effects are noticeable (if the canopy causing the turbulence is going any other way then straight upwind) so the wind direction shouldn't matter. At least I never noticed anything of the kind when doing CReW and filming CReW. ciel bleu, Saskia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mjosparky 3 #21 November 19, 2004 QuoteAircraft wake and wind vortices are turbulent conditions that may cause the PPC to oscillate or cause chute cells to collapse. Wake turbulence, created by any aircraft, whether a 747 or a PPG, is to.be avoided when taking off or landing. This turbulence, which sinks at approximately 7 1/2 FPS If the chute comes into contact with these vortices from another craft, the unit will pitch and roll somewhat violently, and the end cells of the chute can close. This can cause a momentary loss of lift until the cells reopen through the normal forward motion of the wing. Source: Sport Flight, Inc. They appear to go up because you are singing at a faster rate, particularly when doing CReW. All disturbance activity in the air move down wind. SparkyMy idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
swoopdaddio 0 #22 November 19, 2004 Since my name has been mentioned thought I'd join the discussion. It seems that I have been mis-heard, possibly misunderstood but definatley mis-quoted. My comments before the jump in question were about airlocked canopies in general, I don't think they are the complete answer to turbulence, this doesn't mean that I think they are more prone to it either. No matter what canopy you jump, the best way to handle turbulence is to avoid it. Understand where & when turbulence is likely to happen & don't go there. A bit of wake turbulence from another canopy up high is normally not a problem & can be quite educational. The turbulence that gives us problems is the stuff near the ground because we've got less time to recover from it. The examples of turbulence I have on video show it happening just prior to flare time, which is hardly surprising since this is similar height to your average dropzone obstacles, trees, hangars & other buildings. If you suspect turbulence & it's unavoidable fly through it in full drive, get into a plf (feet & knees together) & be prepared to flare with a bit more speed & force than normal should you get "dropped" by the dirty air. One more thing, how do you do a flat turn without any brake input? Let's be careful out there !!!! CL25 years & still lovin' it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skyspike 0 #23 November 19, 2004 I agree BlueS Guido"Der Tod stellt aus versorgungsrechtlicher Sicht die stärkste Form der Dienstunfähigkeit dar." (Unterrichtsblätter für die Bundeswehrverwaltung) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
