Wingloadings

[R00tj00se 0]

What are people's views on the current wing loading trends amongst jumpers and parachute manufacturers. I see people in the 200 - 1000 jump range who consider a 1.3 - 1.4 wing loading moderate. To me, that seems slightly excessive no matter what you are jumping - unless you are going cross braced.
I'm also curious about the fact that Icarus recommend that their crossfire be jumped in the 1.4 and upwards range. I appreciate that this is for experienced jumpers but what if you were to underload one of these canopies - would it have an adverse effect (for example, in turbulence).

[AndyMan 7]

There's no point in going crossbraced if you're not loading upwards of 2.0. The extra rigidity of the wing simply isn't of benefit.

Considering many skydiving centers with good canopy schools are recomending most jumpers with 40 jumps buy at 1.2, I see nothing wrong with calling 1.3 wingloading at 200 jumps moderate.

I don't know specifically about the Crossfire, but I do know the Stiletto. The Stiletto becomes very prone to turbulence if it's not loaded above the minimum PD recomends, which is 1.26 on the 190. This is especially true as you approach the smaller sizes, which is why PD does allow fo intermediate level jumpers to jump the bigger Stilettos, but not the smaller ones - regardless of wingloading.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[quade 3]

There are a lot of wacky-assed ideas that you'll get from a lot of folks on the internet (including maybe me) with regard to what wingloading a person -should- be flying. All of that is just plane speculation unless they've seen you land and have worked with you personally as an instructor or mentor.

Generally speaking people -should- follow the recommendations of the canopy manufacturer no matter what anybody else (that isn't your skydiving mentor) has to say.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Watcher 0]

Quote

There's no point in going crossbraced if you're not loading upwards of 2.0. The extra rigidity of the wing simply isn't of benefit.

Thats is not exactly true. A stiletto starts to max out performance wise at around 1.6:1. A Velocity at 1.7 Still flys amazingly well and has a huge increase in performance that you would not get from a Stiletto. I fly my Velocity at 1.85:1 and I notice the extra rigidity and is a huge benefiet. If you notice many pilots on the circut while originally starting out with a 2.4:1 or higher have been scaleing back to be in the 1.9-2.1:1 because greater distance can be had, and can make better carving turns also. This is the general loading for a 21cell, a 27 cell seems to like an extra .2-.4 loading. PD reps have stated that the optimal for a velocity falls in the 2.0:1 range. So flying slightly under that is still going to be a huge performance gain and is well worth it.

Jonathan

[Kolla 0]

Quote

The Stiletto becomes very prone to turbulence if it's not loaded above the minimum PD recomends, which is 1.26 on the 190. This is especially true as you approach the smaller sizes, which is why PD does allow fo intermediate level jumpers to jump the bigger Stilettos, but not the smaller ones - regardless of wingloading.

_Am

- Andy, where did you see those minimums for the Stiletto? As far as I know, the only canopy Performance Designs has put minimums on is the Velocity (and even with that canopy the minimums are very low - exit weight to equal size of the canopy in sq.ft.).

Please let me know!
Thanks,
Kolla

Blue Skies Magazine

[quade 3]

Perhaps not minimums but definately "not recommended" according to THIS.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Scoby 0]

Hmmm, the *maximum* wingloading PD seems to be recommending for intermediate jumpers on the larger Stilettos is .8:1, at least on the page Quade linked to. Where does the 1.26:1 figure come from? If the canopy was unstable at that wingload, why would PD be listing it?

[Hallur 0]

The loading for the intmi. on a stiletto 190 is 0.8 and not 1.2 the chart that Quade linked from PD says that, and it dosnt say any thing about minimum only VLC.

When I stop skydiving is the day that I die!!! Hallur

[TALONSKY 0]

Well as far as the Crossfire goes I think they need to be loaded heavy. The nose design is very closed off only small inlets at the bottom of the nose for air. They are big enough but most of the nose is formed and I personally would never recommend under loading one for that reason.
Kik

[quade 3]

Subjective terms such as "heavy" can often get misinterpreted by people.

Try THIS.

Icarus recommends loadings from 1.4:1 to 2.1:1 on the Crossfire 2.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[skycat 0]

I used to jump a Crossfire 116 @1.1 and currently jump a Crossfire 104 @ 1.2 WL and I've jumped a Crossfire2 108 @ ~1.2. Not counting the 116 which would collapse with front riser imput, I've have no problems in turbulance, high winds, with openings, or anything at all. The front riser presure isn't very high and I'm not a strong girl. The canopy flies very well and is extremely dependable/reliable even in turbulance, it actually breaths less than my other canopy which I load higher.

Now I do have problems with my stiletto 97 @1.3 with end cell closure on opening, although this could be because the canopy is out of trim, I'll be relining it with vectran as soon as I get the money together for it, but since I rarely jump it, for me there is no rush.

Fly it like you stole it!

[billvon 2,421]

>Andy, where did you see those minimums for the Stiletto?

I've never seen minimums for the Stiletto (haven't even looked) but I can say from firsthand experience that a 1:1 loaded Stiletto is dangerously unstable in turbulence. 1.26 to 1 as a minimum is probably a good guideline.

[billvon 2,421]

>I see people in the 200 - 1000 jump range who consider a 1.3 - 1.4
> wing loading moderate.

Someone with 500 jumps who jumps a 1.4 loaded canopy who has had canopy control training is no problem. The same person who has made an effort to self-teach himself canopy control is taking some risks, and the same person who has never done anything beyond learning where to flare is probably going to seriously injure or kill themselves. It's all in your training and skill, and being able to stand up a given canopy does _not_ mean that the jumper has enough skill to safely fly a given canopy.

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

Andy, where did you see those minimums for the Stiletto?

I didn't. In a fever-induced dementia I misread the numbers on PD's webpage. D'oh!

though shall not post while drugged...

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[AggieDave 6]

I thought that the only canopy that could be "underloaded" made by PD was the Velocity, the rest could be lightly loaded, but PD made no standard as to what, if there was one, the minimum loading should be.

With that said, I don't think I've ever seen anyone load a Spinetto as low as 1:1 so I couldn't honestly say what it would do (the ones I've jumped were loaded 1:4 and 1:6), both of which flew great).

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[tspillers 0]

Actually, there are some DZ's who use Stilleto "type" canopies for their students and they load them about .8:1

I am not totally useless, I can be used as a bad example.

[ernokaikkonen 0]

Quote

Actually, there are some DZ's who use Stilleto "type" canopies for their students and they load them about .8:1

What canopies would those be?

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

Actually, there are some DZ's who use Stilleto "type" canopies for their students and they load them about .8:1

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


What canopies would those be?

What dropzones would that be?

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[rgoper 0]

i'll give you 13 guesses, the first 12 don't count!

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[AndyMan 7]

The culprit in this debate is USUALLY skydive chicago, but they jump sabre 2's, used to jump safires, before safires they jumped normal sabre's.

the stories that they put students under stilettos are largely false.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[rgoper 0]

i know of one dz in texas, and one in florida that is using semi elipiticals loading up to wings of 1:2:1 for their training programs. i think this is "new wave" and maybe best? most student get off of their training program and are immediately downsizing between 60-80 if not 90 sq ft. of canopy. so it's hard to determine which is the "lesser of two evils" start em' out small, or start em' out big, and let them get small on their own? most people won't listen and downsize rapidly anyway simply because of peer pressure. when i graduated a certain person reccomended a 150 sq ft canopy, (i trained on a 230 at a 1:06:1 wing) but my ex-divemaster put a stop to that when i ordered my equipment, and i wound up with a 210 sq ft, looking back in retrospect, i'm glad i did, although having said that, i was tired of it after only 100 jumps or so, it was like hauling an anvil around! i think the sky diving community needs to make sure new sky divers are fully informed with "correct" information, including all facets of containers and canopies before making any gear decisions after graduation and purchasing their own gear.

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[billvon 2,421]

> i know of one dz in texas, and one in florida that is using semi
> elipiticals loading up to wings of 1:2:1 for their training programs. i
> think this is "new wave" and maybe best? most student get off of
> their training program and are immediately downsizing between 60
>-80 if not 90 sq ft. of canopy

That's the right way to do it - train them early how to land highly loaded canopies, and teach them how to do it right. Generally, a jumper with canopy control training under a Velocity 104 is going to be safer at 100 jumps than a self-taught jumper under a Stiletto 135 at 100 jumps.

[webracer 0]

I think wingloading is subjective. Instructors (myself included) need to be more involved with canopy control for students and low-timers (less than 300 jumps). I was at 1.2:1 from jump 13-30(Sabre), 1.3:1 from Jump 31-228(Sabre), 1.5:1 from jump 229-300 (Samurai), and from jump 300 to present at 1.7:1(Samurai). I downsized quicker than most, but without complaints from staff. My canopy skills are solid, and I take comments from others when offered. I also did some early-on canopy training with Chris Bagwell, and later with Brian Germain when I switched to the Samurai. That said, now that it is time to downsize again, I am not doing it. The wingloading where I am at now is quite challenging when I want it to be (and when I make mistakes), and I don't see a need to downsize.
Wingloading is subjective. Assess the subject for a better decision.

Troy

I am now free to exercise my downward mobility.

[cobaltdan 0]

What canopies would those be?

there are dz's that teach begineers on spaces, safires, sabre2, hornets, and cobalts.... all are elliptical and all properly loaded are suitable for begineers.

sincerely,

dan<><>

Daniel Preston <><>
atairaerodynamics.com (sport)
atairaerospace.com (military)

[Zlew 0]

<
I have to call bullshit On that one man...
I've jumped stilettos at just about every wing loading
1.2
1.3.
1.6
1.8
1.9 (and over 2 with lead)
I can promsie you that even at 1.9:1 the stiletto performs just like it should...that is on the high speed and low speed end of the spectrum. Glide is still there....flare....everything.

I wish you could hear Kolla's voice on this webpage.... one of those sexy can't quite place the accent voices.

Z