Safire Sizes

[johnny1488 1]

I was speaking with an Icarus rep about demoing a safire the other day. She told me that Icarus measures their canopies with a different method than other manufacturers so a 209 in an Icarus canopy would be closer to a 190 than a 210 in a comparable canopy say from PD. Has anyone flown canopies of similar sizes (on paper) from Icarus and PD like a safire 169 and a Sabre2 170 or a spectre and omega? Im curently on a PD210 and I dont want to get a safire 189 and have it be more like a PD 170. Im hopefully going to get a hold of a 209 but I'd like to hear anyones thoughts on their differences in the mean time.
Johnny

[mountainman 0]

Johnny....I was on a Raider 220 throughout my student progression and then during a recent boogie, I went from that to a Safire 189 to demo. It wasn't a TON faster, but it was and you have to "flare" later so that you dont stall the canopy. I thought that it was really not a big problem. After 7 jumps or so so on the 189, I demoed the 169 for 4 jumps and that was a LOT faster. I have 37 jumps right now and have ordered the 169. I load the 169 around 1.35:1 and I think that it is good for me. So, depending on your weight, you can decide. But, I dont think that going right to the 189 would be a bad decision. But, you have to go with what makes you comfortable. Good luck!!
--------------
Brandon Wren

[skymedic 0]

1.35 Brandon?
I guess if it works for you have at it.
Marc
Because I fly, I envy no man on earth

[PhreeZone 15]

If you are in doubt ask to get the PIA sizing chart for each canopy you are looking at. PIA tends to be an impartial judge in square area. When you get to ellipticals/semi-ellipticals then it becomes a little difficult to get a percise measurement of the footage but they tend to give numbers that reflect the true size and not the marketed size.
I've packed my Spectre 170 a couple of hundred times now and helped on an Omega 169 once and they felt like they were close in size and pack volume. Take that as you will.....
On the other part of this thread.... I've said what I wanted to months ago....
Be safe, be smooth, be fast..... and most importantly.... be phree

• Quote

[mountainman 0]

Quote

1.35 Brandon?
I guess if it works for you have at it.

Quote

On the other part of this thread.... I've said what I wanted to months ago....

Thanks guys! I know that you are looking out for safely, which is why I'm done getting pissed at all this. So, for what its worth, I AM going to be VERY careful with it and respect its "authorita".
--------------
Brandon Wren

[TALONSKY 0]

I currently fly a Safire 169. I was also told the same thing from Icarus rep. I did compare my canopy to a 170 Hornet laying the canopies out on the ground. There was a definite differents in size. I think mine is closer to a 160 to the way the rest of the industry stanards are. I also have flown that Hornet and I feel that the Safire is superier to the Hornet.
Blue Skies
Kirk

[Geoff 0]

This is true. I went from a Spectre 135 to a Safire 129 and it was a helluva lot faster. I later found out that Safires are 7% smaller than most other canopies of the same placarded square footage, so it's more like a 120 really.
Also, only the Safire and Omega are measured like this, not other Icarus canopies. I'm now getting a Crossfire, but I don't want to downsize, so Icarus have told me to get a Crossfire 119, to stay the same size as a Safire 129.
Geoff

[sunshine 2]

I used to fly a Safire 169. I loved flying it but always had trouble with landing it. My new canopy is a 170 from the PD line and doesn't move near as fast as the Safire. The whole sizing thing is weird. I highly respect the person that told me to go with a 170. I thought he was crazy when he said it was the same size as a Safire 190, but now I know he was right.
Cowboy take me away. Fly this girl as high as you can into the wildblue ~ Dixie Chicks

[apoil 0]

Then why does a safire 139 pack up tightly into a main container that is designed for a 135?
I heard that Icarus moved to a measurement system that conforms to industry standards.
It would be nice if we could get information that is not continuously in conflict.

[Swanee 0]

I did about 6 jumps on a Sabre 170 before deciding on a Safire 169 loaded at about 1.5 (I'm a big boy) I didn't detect much difference as far as descent rate and speed went. I now have 95 jumps on the Safire and am learning how to land it. (I had a tendency to flare too high) I am convinced it is the right size for my weight and it will be a long long time (if ever) that I will consider downsizing. I'm still packing the Sabre 170 for a friend and, if anything, the Sabre 170 packs bigger than the Safire 169 (may have something to do with the Sabre having only about 20 jumps on it)

[johnny1488 1]

Thanks everyone, Im probably gonna go with the 209 first. If its to slow' (I doubt it but) i can always try the 189. Im a bit over 200 w/o gear so an "approximate 200" from a 209 should suit me fine. Besides Icarus said they dont have one for me yet. Not easy suckers to get a hold of that big.
Johnny

[riggerrob 558]

Will someone please explain to me why every canopy manufacturer insists on using a different method to measure canopies?
I could understand the confusion when I bought my Strato-Star - back in 1979 - but somewhere along the way PIA published a standard method for measuring rectangular canopies.
Sign me "confused."

[johnny1488 1]

I was under the impression that semi elliptical or full eliptical arent rectangles per say so a normal method of measuring would be slightly inaccurate. Does that sound feasable or more like something I just made up. hint...its the second one!
Johnny

[PhreeZone 15]

Your right. Measusing Ellipital canopies is more of an art then a science. I've heard of people making a large templete(life size) of their canopy on grid paper and counting the blocks that are used to get a number that is really close. Now if you want to count 3 inch squares to get an "accurate" size thats your choice.
Be safe, be smooth, be fast..... and most importantly.... be phree

• Quote