Pack volume (f111 vs zp)

[fudd 0]

Hi
I know this is a bit difficult to give a straight answer to. (I also surfed some of the other pack volume posts, sorry for make one more. I didn't find any posts comparing f111 and zp pack volumes. )
Anyway,
I have a Vector II, which holds a PD190(that's f111) with micro lines (or now a clipper 190 with dacron lines) just fine. (not loose, maybe a tiny bit thight but the loop can be made a little longer)
I considering buying a Hornet 190 (thats zp fabric).
Only problem is that I doesn't have the opertunity to try how it fits my container. I've heard that ZP fabric creates a little bigger volume than f111 because there will be more air in the packjob. (less if you are a good packer, but still more).
Has anyone changed from same size f111 to same size Hornet (Or other zp canopy).
Should I take my chances, buying a Hornet and expect that it will fit in my container?
Since it's the same size, can I expect it to be somewhat simular in packvolume?

[drenaline 0]

Quote

. I've heard that ZP fabric creates a little bigger volume than f111 because there will be more air in the packjob.

Not a packer or a rigger but I think you answered your own question, the volume is the same the problem is the air.

go to the PIA site and check the size table and see if the size is the same, it doesn't depends much on the fabric it depends on the manufacturer sizing (ie. A factory 150 is not the same size than anothers factory 150).

HISPA 21
www.panamafreefall.com

[steve1 5]

Hornets do pack up smaller than most other OP canopies and the material is really nice to work with, but if you have been packing F1-11 material in the past, it will take a while to get used to. My guess would be that a Hornet will probably fit into your present container but it will be tighter, harder to get in the bag, and you'll probably have to let your closing loop out. I had a talon container that was made for 150 OP canopy. My 195 Falcon was snug, but still fit nice in it. My 170 hornet also fit well. It was almost the same pack volume as the 195 Falcon. I hope this helps. Steve1

[ernokaikkonen 0]

I have an old version of a canopy volume chart. As I recall it is published by PIA? My version has no Hornets in it, does anyone know where to find the latest version of the chart?

Erno

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Only problem is that I doesn't have the opertunity to try how it fits my container.

Ask the manufacturer what the pack volume is, in cubic inches. Manufacturers should have this info readily available on all their canopies. Years ago, the industry came up with a standardized way to measure this. Compare that canopy pack volume to the container volume on your rig. My Racer has the container volume stamped on the inside of the reserve pin flap.

[freeflyswc 0]

> the volume is the same the problem is the air


Not alway's true , it depends on what kind of canopy . some have airlocks , crossbraces , partially formed noses , all of which add to pack volume

[fudd 0]

Thanks for all the info. It has helped me come closer to an understanding if the hornet190 will fit or notthis article from PD about pack volume.
Comparing given volume sizes gives meg close to nothing:
PD190: 442
Clipper 194: 398
Saber2 190: 416
Heatwave 170: 371
Couldn't find the pack volume for the Hornet. However, when comparing the differnce in pack volumes/sizes/manufacturers and your information, I have a feeling I would get the Hornet into my container. Maybe a tight fit but possible. (urgh, I can't afford a new container too...)

[steve1 5]

Fudd,
My new container is a javelin J2. The manufacturers specs. say that up to a 150 OP will fit into it. Yet my Hornet 170 fits in it nice. Snug yes, but I like it. Steve1

[puffdaddy 0]

Try the PISA website www.pisa.co.za They are the manufacturers of the Hornet.

" You have never lived until you've almost died, and for those who has experienced it, life has a flavour the protected would never understand"

[ernokaikkonen 0]

>Ask the manufacturer what the pack volume is, in cubic inches.
>Manufacturers should have this info readily available on all their
> canopies.

The problem is that measuring the canopy volume is an inexact science at best. For example, PD does not give the volumes of their canopies on any of their lists. The results vary a _lot_ even on an individual canopy.

The values given by the manufacturers may or may not be results from the standard measuring practise, and may have an element of marketing in them.

> Years ago, the industry came up with a standardized
>way to measure this.

Yeah, the procedure is detailed in here.

>Compare that canopy pack volume to the container volume on your rig.

...But there is no standard way of measuring the volume of a rig AFAIK. The best chance would be to find results for your current canopy, and then compare those with results of your new canopy.

Some results can be found on BillVons homepage. Do note that there are often multiple entries for the same canopy.

Erno

[Zoltan 0]

So you are upgrading a ZP canopy form a PD190...

Why are you considering a 190 Hornet. If you were comfortable with your PD 190 than the optimal ZP canopy size for you is abou 150.
Hornet is a good canopy it packs about the same size as PD Sabre, but because of the material is different the packjob is easier.

Test a lot and have fun,

blue skies,

z

[ernokaikkonen 0]

Zoltan,

The way people downsize in Finland would be probably considered insane on many DZs in the rest of the world. We downsize much faster, downsize more than one size at a time, and often in addition to getting a smaller canopy, we switch to elliptical at the same time.

AFAIK none of these are generally considered a good idea.

That being said, I don't think there are many more related accidents in Finland than elsewhere. That could be partly because most people here are trained in S/L or IAD progression, giving the students more time under canopy than the ones trained on AFF.

Erno

[Zoltan 0]

Erno,

you are right.... i easily forget about the special things in Finland...

blue skies,

ps:
(ja tämö on koska jadi opetussystemi on parempi kuin nova, mun mielesti)

[fudd 0]

Wingload restrictions in Norway demands more than 200 jumps before I can exceed 1.1. I load 190 at 1.1 170 at 1.18 and 150 at 1.34.
If I lose some weight I can go for a 170 People over here would call me insane if I started jumping a 150
I found the pack voulme for Hornet at PISA's website
170- 375
190- 410
Both should fit the container, if it's not to much difference in measurments.

[Zoltan 0]

yes... Erno was right
If the restrictions are so than you better follow them. For your safety and for the peace at your home DZ.

blue skies,

z

[ernokaikkonen 0]

Just checked; The parachute-committee of the Finnish aeronautical association states that jumpers under 250 jumps should not exceed wingloading of 1.3:1(rounded down from 1.34).

Erno

[riggerrob 558]

Only trust volume measurements published by container manufacturers. Most of the PIA volume numbers were measured at Rigging Innovations, a container manufacturer.
Also consider how relative humidity affects pack volume. For example, if you live in the desert, you will struggle to pack a canopy that your buddy - who lives in a humid climate - packs easily.