DaVinciflies 0 #51 July 12, 2012 QuoteWould you not agree that someone should fully explore the performance envelope of their canopy before downsizing? Landing on rears is part of that exploration, in my opinion.Quote No I wouldn't. The vast majority of jumpers will NEVER fully explore the performance capabilities of any canopy they jump, nor should they unless by choice. What jumpers should do is become competent in the use of a canopy before downsizing, but more importantly they should understand that in most cases there is NO REASON TO DOWNSIZE. The suggestion that a jumper isn't safe unless he/she is competent to fly their canopy like a bat outta hell (full performance envelope) is absurd. You are misquoting me. I never suggested that anyone has to fly like a bat out of hell, what I said was that BEFORE THEY DOWNSIZE people should fully explore the performance of their current wing, otherwise I agree, there is no need to downsize. Landing on rears is not dangerous, nor is it particularly hard, given the right training and practice and that involves starting with bigger, beginner canopies and not trying it for the first time when you get your first cross-brace. I put it in the same area as practicing downwind and crosswind landings - do it on a larger wing to start with and keep honing that skill with every change in canopy. Saying people don't need to downsize, while true in a lot of cases, doesn't stop them wanting to so lets at least equip them with some skills for when they do. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hcnielsen 1 #52 July 12, 2012 yes. As a student, maybe jump #12? Steering line broke at the fingertrap, so I unstowed the left toggle, played around (turns, practice flares) above my decision altitude, and decided I'd be okay. Nice soft standup landing but I overshot my intended touchdown point by a bit. My first parachute training was in the Army on T-10s, so I wasn't concerned about my ability to PLF or use risers, but wasn't too familiar with how a ram-air would react to the riser inputs. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #53 July 12, 2012 QuoteQuoteWould you not agree that someone should fully explore the performance envelope of their canopy before downsizing? Landing on rears is part of that exploration, in my opinion.Quote No I wouldn't. The vast majority of jumpers will NEVER fully explore the performance capabilities of any canopy they jump, nor should they unless by choice. What jumpers should do is become competent in the use of a canopy before downsizing, but more importantly they should understand that in most cases there is NO REASON TO DOWNSIZE. The suggestion that a jumper isn't safe unless he/she is competent to fly their canopy like a bat outta hell (full performance envelope) is absurd. You are misquoting me. I never suggested that anyone has to fly like a bat out of hell, what I said was that BEFORE THEY DOWNSIZE people should fully explore the performance of their current wing, otherwise I agree, there is no need to downsize. Landing on rears is not dangerous, nor is it particularly hard, given the right training and practice and that involves starting with bigger, beginner canopies and not trying it for the first time when you get your first cross-brace. I put it in the same area as practicing downwind and crosswind landings - do it on a larger wing to start with and keep honing that skill with every change in canopy. Saying people don't need to downsize, while true in a lot of cases, doesn't stop them wanting to so lets at least equip them with some skills for when they do. Not needing to downsize is true in almost EVERY case. Actually you said jumpers should fully explore the performance envelope of their canopy before downsizing. Going like a bat outta hell IS part of that envelope, especially considering the motive behind the performance exploration you spoke of is downsizing preparation. You seem to speak from the perspective of someone who flies and advocates canopies on the highest end of the performance spectrum. The vast majority of skydivers will never come close to flying ultra-performance canopies. I do believe people who want to fly hot rods should develop the skills necessary to be safe doing so, but I do not believe honing performance flying skills is needed nor overly helpful to jumpers who prefer slower canopies and docile flying techniques. Not downsizing never hurt anyone.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bucketlistpilot 1 #54 July 12, 2012 If you were to practice with rear risers up high, what, if any, are the differences between stall recovery from toggles vs risers?Ian Purvis http://www.loadupsoftware.com LoadUp DZ Management App [email protected] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaVinciflies 0 #55 July 12, 2012 I do agree with most of what you say, Chuck, and I guess I was thinking about Bat Out Of Hell flying near the ground. I also agree with your perspective of only downsize if you have a valid reason, and the skills (valid does not include "I got this great deal on a small container but it will only hold a 99"). Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #56 July 12, 2012 QuoteI do agree with most of what you say, Chuck, and I guess I was thinking about Bat Out Of Hell flying near the ground. I also agree with your perspective of only downsize if you have a valid reason, and the skills (valid does not include "I got this great deal on a small container but it will only hold a 99"). +1 Especially the small rig excuse.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #57 July 13, 2012 QuoteI'm well versed in the stall principles in aircraft. But a typical aircraft doesn't stall suddenly and completely like a canopy will on rears. I can think of several that do... Pitts Special for one."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CSpenceFLY 1 #58 July 13, 2012 QuoteQuoteI'm well versed in the stall principles in aircraft. But a typical aircraft doesn't stall suddenly and completely like a canopy will on rears. I can think of several that do... Pitts Special for one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #59 July 13, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm well versed in the stall principles in aircraft. But a typical aircraft doesn't stall suddenly and completely like a canopy will on rears. I can think of several that do... Pitts Special for one. A Pitts is a typical aircraft. Wings engine, the whole bit. But if you want to play stupid games, do you consider a Bonanza something atypical?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CSpenceFLY 1 #60 July 13, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI'm well versed in the stall principles in aircraft. But a typical aircraft doesn't stall suddenly and completely like a canopy will on rears. I can think of several that do... Pitts Special for one. A Pitts is a typical aircraft. Wings engine, the whole bit. But if you want to play stupid games, do you consider a Bonanza something atypical? Not getting into another definition pissing match. You win. A Pitts is just like every other airplane, as typical as it could be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hcnielsen 1 #61 July 13, 2012 correction to my post; it was jump #19. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
speedy 0 #62 July 13, 2012 QuoteLanding on rears is not dangerous, nor is it particularly hard, given the right training and practice and that involves starting with bigger, beginner canopies and not trying it for the first time when you get your first cross-brace. That all I'm saying. It's just that I was starting to get the feeling from this thread that everyone should go out next weekend and try and land on rears because it's a useful skill to have. I know people with thousands of jumps that have never landed on rears and have also never hurt themselves. I just don't want some 100 jump wonder attempting to land on rears for the first time next Saturday on his newly downsized canopy with no training on what to expect because Ron lands on rears 95% of the time. Dave Fallschirmsport Marl Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #63 July 13, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI'm well versed in the stall principles in aircraft. But a typical aircraft doesn't stall suddenly and completely like a canopy will on rears. I can think of several that do... Pitts Special for one. A Pitts is a typical aircraft. Wings engine, the whole bit. But if you want to play stupid games, do you consider a Bonanza something atypical? Not getting into another definition pissing match. You win. A Pitts is just like every other airplane, as typical as it could be. 1. You are trying to get into a pissing match.. The proof is in your posts. May I remind you that YOU replied to me and started trying to play stupid games. The question is why you feel you need to act like that... Not that I personally care. 2. You ignored what I actually wrote... I wrote 'several that do' and used a Pitts as an example. You then ignored the Bonanza... I could bring several more examples, just like I claimed, like a Swift. So yeah, you do try to start little pissing matches and you don't even bother to read or understand the post you reply to."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fcajump 153 #64 July 13, 2012 QuoteIf you were to practice with rear risers up high, what, if any, are the differences between stall recovery from toggles vs risers? In the midst of all the various arguments, a great question! Based on your question and profile, I will assume you are not dealing with 540-turns-to-final on a 76sqr-foot canopy… The biggest difference is going to be the pull-distance for any given response. The range of acceptable distance you can fly/control the canopy with the toggles is a very wide range. The difference between left and right toggle that will cause bad behavior is also (relatively) wide. On rear risers in the range where slower flight/stall occur, the difference between control and stall is much smaller and the tolerance for left/right differential is much less. The risers will stall much more dynamically with less distance between flights, mush, stall and collapse. (I find there is little “mush” compared to using my brakes to stall.) Likewise the recovery is going to be more dynamic. Dropping the risers in a full stall is going to be similar to dropping the toggles from a full stall. Remember we don’t recommend that when recovering from a brake stall? Too much surge, too much swing and chance for uneven repressurization of the canopy. It is important that you keep things level during the stall/recovery as well. This can be done easily with those risers in your hands, but you need to stay on the controls the whole time… don’t just let it go. Again, gentle recovery, but the distance to relax is much less than with brakes and when the canopy is ½ recovered it will want to GO… remember that in this case you don’t have the tail pulled down to slow its forward speed when the wing gets back to a correct (forward) angle of attack. Concerns when doing a full stall (either method): CLEAR YOUR AIRSPACE – be high and make sure no one else is around, especially UNDER Recovery from a full stall (especially when done too quickly) can result in the PC being in front of the canopy, possibly around the A/B lines. Uneven recovery can cause one side to surge and start a spin. This can lead to, uncommanded change of heading or line twists. If the line twists catch one or more lines asymmetrically, this can turn into an unrecoverable spin. As the results going into/out of a stall with risers is quicker and more dynamic, there is less tolerance of being uneven or turbulent air. This increases the chance of bad things happening. All that having been said, I personally feel that one should experiment (high, in clear air) with all flight modes of their canopy, whether or not they ever want to down-size*. Knowing how your canopy responds in all situations might just save you from a bad situation, spot or unnecessary cut-away.** *agree with the notion that 99% of the time there is no reason to downsize. **on the other hand, we just discussed that even practicing these things _can_ lead to the need to cut-away… so, consider that too… Talk more with a canopy coach… not one that pushes what you need to do for downsizing, but what you need to do to learn about the gear you are currently flying. Just my $.02 JWAlways remember that some clouds are harder than others... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 259 #65 July 13, 2012 QuoteAnd again I ask - does it make sense to practice something that might hurt you just so you don't get hurt when you do it later? Ask USPA that question. They require that jumpers practice several things that can hurt them if they want a license. Water training, night jumps, landing from half brakes, landing crosswind... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bucketlistpilot 1 #66 July 13, 2012 Thanks JW. I really appreciate the time you spent to explain that. And you're correct, I'm not busting 540's. Much to the amazement of the kids on the dz, I'm still more than happy flying my 210 main at 1.15 wl.Ian Purvis http://www.loadupsoftware.com LoadUp DZ Management App [email protected] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,400 #67 July 13, 2012 >>Would you not agree that someone should fully explore the performance envelope of >> their canopy before downsizing? Landing on rears is part of that exploration, in my >> opinion. >No I wouldn't. The vast majority of jumpers will NEVER fully explore the performance >capabilities of any canopy they jump, nor should they unless by choice. Agreed and agreed. >What jumpers should do is become competent in the use of a canopy before >downsizing, but more importantly they should understand that in most cases there is >NO REASON TO DOWNSIZE. Also agreed. But note that the DV said they should learn that "before downsizing" - and THAT I agree with. >The suggestion that a jumper isn't safe unless he/she is competent to fly their canopy >like a bat outta hell (full performance envelope) is absurd. A jumper who cannot fly their canopy like a bat out of hell is less safe than someone who is more skilled. Are they "safe enough?" That's up to each jumper. But in general, less-skilled jumpers are better off under larger canopies. >And again I ask - does it make sense to practice something that might hurt you just >so you don't get hurt when you do it later? That tradeoff is an important one. But in general I tend towards the side of more training rather than less. To speak to the more specific examples - no, you shouldn't have someone throw your PC out the door. But learning to exit and be stable instantly teaches the skills to handle that if it ever arises. No, you shouldn't get in a wrap intentionally. But doing CRW is an excellent way to learn about how to fly around other canopies; even intentionally contact them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #68 July 13, 2012 Quote>>Would you not agree that someone should fully explore the performance envelope of >> their canopy before downsizing? Landing on rears is part of that exploration, in my >> opinion. >No I wouldn't. The vast majority of jumpers will NEVER fully explore the performance >capabilities of any canopy they jump, nor should they unless by choice. Agreed and agreed. >What jumpers should do is become competent in the use of a canopy before >downsizing, but more importantly they should understand that in most cases there is >NO REASON TO DOWNSIZE. Also agreed. But note that the DV said they should learn that "before downsizing" - and THAT I agree with. >The suggestion that a jumper isn't safe unless he/she is competent to fly their canopy >like a bat outta hell (full performance envelope) is absurd. A jumper who cannot fly their canopy like a bat out of hell is less safe than someone who is more skilled. Are they "safe enough?" That's up to each jumper. But in general, less-skilled jumpers are better off under larger canopies. >And again I ask - does it make sense to practice something that might hurt you just >so you don't get hurt when you do it later? That tradeoff is an important one. But in general I tend towards the side of more training rather than less. To speak to the more specific examples - no, you shouldn't have someone throw your PC out the door. But learning to exit and be stable instantly teaches the skills to handle that if it ever arises. No, you shouldn't get in a wrap intentionally. But doing CRW is an excellent way to learn about how to fly around other canopies; even intentionally contact them. Bravo.Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fcajump 153 #69 July 14, 2012 Quote Thanks JW. I really appreciate the time you spent to explain that. And you're correct, I'm not busting 540's. Much to the amazement of the kids on the dz, I'm still more than happy flying my 210 main at 1.15 wl. When I bought my first rig, my instructor told me I'd be board with the canopy (a PD-260/F-111), and that I should get smaller one. He was right, only a short 10 years later, I was board with it and down sized. I now (22 years in) fly a radical Spectre 210 (or my almost as small Spectre 230). They have plenty of flight envelope to keep me entertained and yet provide a comfortable safety margin when the spot/winds/etc aren't quite what I thought/wanted. We're F'ing skydivers... don't need to prove anything to anyone. Its like alcohol... if you don't push the limits and abuse it, you can enjoy it for many years to come. Abuse it and either it will kill you or you'll eventually have to give it up.Keep learning! JWAlways remember that some clouds are harder than others... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
