Does it concern anyone that . . .

[quade 3]

Does it concern anyone that the only types of questions and answers yet posted to this forum are the ones that involve swoop type landings?
Where are the newbies with their questions about soft and easy landings?
Paul
http://futurecam.com/skydive.html

[Zennie 0]

Well the forum is called "Swooping & Canopy Control".
But if you're bothered that many people are interested in swooping I'd note just a few things...
First, swooping is becoming very popular.... to the point of having entire events based around it. So I think it's kind of natural for people to become interested and ask quesitons about it.
Second, most of the "standard" landing skills should have hopefully been covered while folks were still on student status. Not that such questions wouldn't be welcomed here anyway.
Finally and most important, I think forums like this are a good thing from a safety perspective. If people talk about techniques & training methodologies, I think more people will use safe practices which reduce the risk of injury.
Me personally? I want to learn to swoop. Not to impress anyone (I'm married), but because it's fun. At the same time I'm not in any big macho race to fly the smallest canopy or bust out a 180 snap hook at 400 feet with my jump numbers.
I'm going at it gradually and trying to learn how my canopy flies. The questions that I've seen here seem to be from people who are at a similar stage and I find the questions intelligent and the provided information extremely useful.
Just my $0.02
"Zero Tolerance: the politically correct term for zero thought, zero common sense."

[quade 3]

It doesn't bother me (too much) that people are interested in swooping. What does concern me is that (and I might be totally off base with this assumption) there are people that don't have their D-license yet, but are already jonesing for high-performance landings.
As for covering the basics while on student status . . . don't even get me started! Wait, too late, you just did.
At my DZ, there are people, skydivers, with many years in the sport and close to 1,000 jumps that for some reason haven't figured out how to land their canopy. I don't mean they haven't learned to land their canopy "properly", I mean they consistantly biff in on their asses.
Now, maybe it's different where you jump, but this is something I've noticed over the course of several years and at several drop zones around the country.
What's worse is that somebody out there keeps telling these folks that the "right" way to land a canopy is to build up a little excess speed. I've actually heard -this- phrase from a professional swoop competitor as advice to newbies "airspeed equalls lift". Besides being mostly wrong -- I can not think of anything more dangerous to say to a newbie.
As for your arguments . . .
1) Yeah, there are swoop contests. There are also two types of accuracy landing contests and Pro-rating landings.
2) I think I already covered in my semi-rant.
3) I'll agree with education being a good thing.
4) If you think you're not doing something to impress anyone, then look into a mirror. Hey, it's FINE to do this, but don't kid yourself. The only reason anyone does anything is because they want to. That includes paying taxes -- you could always take the jail time. ;^) So, anyway, yes, you're doing it to impress yourself. There's no other -logical- reason.
So, don't get me wrong, I think this is a fine forum, but I'm just concerned that the emphasis is going to get -way- skewed.
Paul
http://futurecam.com/skydive.html

[PhreeZone 15]

Whats concerning me even more are there are seveal people on here that are less then 100 jumps and they are considering thier 1.3 or 1.4 loading to be modest. Not to go Canopy Nazi on everyone but this should not be allowed to happen. 1.3 or 1.4 is the same loading that some of the people at the Pond Swoop Nationals this year with a few 1000 jumps were jumping. How is it that low timers think they can fly the same exact canopy as well as those with 1000's more jumps then them?
I started on canopies at .75:1-.9:1 loading less then 2 years ago. I made lots of mistakes (I'll admit to most of them) and had it not been for the larger canopy, I probally would have never made it to jump 20 without a broken leg. At jump 35 I got a ZP canopy and loaded it 1.1:1. This allowed me to learn the skills needed for survival and still work on better and higher speed landings. At 185 jumps I was finally ready for a 1.25 loading. A demod a canopy for 10 jumps and went back to the larger canopy after seeing that I had some to learn still. At 215 jumps I bought the Cobalt 150 that I currently have. Now I don't consider my self to be a slow learner, but how has everyone else learned the same skills in less then 75 or 100 jumps to be on a 1.4:1 loading that its taken me 255 to learn thus far? I took a canopy out on Saturday at 1.58:1 and after 1 jump gave it back because I realized that I am not even close to the skill level needed to fly it great, let alone swoop with it. I could fly it fine and it was a blast to fly, but what would I learn on it? Not too much right away other then just surviving it again.
Comments?
Phree
Canopy Nazi #2 and damn proud of it!
I want to touch the sky, I want to fly so high ~ Sonique

[Zennie 0]

Nah I'm with you on the aggressive downsizing.
I'm doing about the same as you. Have around 160 on my Sabre 150 loaded around 1.2. I'm looking at a Cobalt 135 which would put me around 1.37. I feel ready and I've asked a lot of people who know me and my flying, and who have jumps in the thousands if I was ready for that loading and they thought so. So I haven't just made this decision without a lot of consultation.
I demoed a Vengeance in the same size and decided that was way too much canopy for me. I'll prolly try a Stiletto and Crossfire in the same size, but my guess is I'll go with the Cobalt. The Cobalt seems to have just the right mix of performance & forgiveness I'm looking for. So even at a given loading you really need to shop around.
But getting to your point. I've seen a *lot* of people with low jump numbers (i.e. below 500) getting into these crazy downsizing contests. One guy goes to a 120, so the next guy goes to a 110 and so on, and so on. It's silly and dangerous.
There is a big big difference between being able to land a canopy and being able to fly it safely. A lot of people seem to be forgetting that. I could tell from flying the Cobalt at 1.3-ish that it has way more drive, which means you really have to be heads up when flying back to the DZ. I'll have plenty of performance for several hundred jumps.
And one point was made in another thread that I wish more people would learn... it ain't so much the canopy loading as the pilot. Try to be a better pilot before going to the hanky-chute just because you think you'll get more swoop.
Yet another $0.02
"Zero Tolerance: the politically correct term for zero thought, zero common sense."

[freeflyguy 0]

I suppose I could chime in. I am not into flame wars. So don't bother.
I feel, if anybody is interested in learning to swoop learn it before you downsize. It seems some get the mentality that a 270 swoop landing is only for a higher wing loading. If you can progressively learn how to do that, with accuracy and safety on a lighter loading, you will be able to transfer that to your new canopy. Proper technique and all includes learning to land soft and slow.
The Australian Parachute Foundation has a high performance flight manual. One thing I found interesting that they said was something to the affect of "We don't endorse or encourage high speed landings, but if you are going to do it, this is how you should learn..." I think it was nice of them to say that. In this country (US) all the litigation crap often keeps people from saying anything. For fear of being sued. That is sad.
So take from it what you will. But we shouldn't create and environment where people are scared to ask for advice. If we do, they may just try to learn on their own. It is really better to be taught.
The amount of gain, and the amount you take from this forum is, and should be limited. Because the best teacher is someone that knows what your skill level is, and can watch and critique your progression. So with anything here, be careful with it, think about it, and see how you can carefully apply it. Or come hang out with us for a while.
With that in mind. Yahoo. I love to swoop!!!

[skycat 0]

Don't forget Zennie that you did learn under a Saber not an F111 like a lot of us did. I really feel that that did give you a slight advantage over someone like me who learned on an F111 with maybe a wingloading of .5 (really it was a round with squared off corners. So I think what you learned under does make a difference on what you are flying after student status.
Kelli

[Spectrejumper 0]

I totally agree with you Phree. It wasn't that long ago that nobody would let you jump a Stiletto until you had 500 jumps. Now it seems everybody is rushing to get a highly loaded elliptical as soon as they graduate AFF. It concerns me even more that people are selling these canopies to jumpers who probably shouldn't be jumping them. I realize that much of our sport is about personal choice, and we're all big boys and girls, but I think there should be some responsibility. I guess I'll stop ranting now. Maybe I qualify for the coveted Canopy Nazi #3. :-)
Mike D-23312
"It's such a shame to spend your time away like this...existing." JMH

[prost 0]

Quade, while I do agree with you on the points you make about newbies, I want to point out one thing. Addressing the comment you made about "Airspeed equals lift", they were right, the more airspeed the more lift. If a canopy has no airspeed, the canopy has no lift. While I do agree with you that we do not need to teach newbies high speed landings before they learn other skills, we shouldn't teach them false info.
William

[quade 3]

For all the folks that "think" they know what the hell they're talking about when they say "Airspeed Equals Lift", please do the following experiment with me.
First some background . . . use your imaginations on this.
Since I'm your flight instructor, I would have already told you about the four forces of flight and how they oppose each other. Thrust opposes drag and lift opposes weight.
Let's go flying!
We're in a Bugsmasher 152 and right at this moment the airplane weighs a total of 1610 pounds. The wing loading is 10.5:1.
We're in straight and level flight, full power and we're "cruising" at a glorious 105 knots.
Ok, we're -not- gaining altitude and we're -not- losing altitude -- we're -maintaining- altitude at 5,000 feet MSL.
Quick -- about how much lift is being created by the wing?
Hmmm, keep that answer in your head for a minute while we reduce the speed of the airplane a bit.
Let's pull back the throttle a bit a -while we maintain altitude- slow down to 60 knots. We'll maintain altitude by changing the angle of attack of the wing.
Quick -- about how much lift is being created by the wing?
Hmmm, let's slow down a little more.
We'll pull back the throttle a bit more and then (this is something most students don't understand) we'll have to add power to go even slower -while we maintain altitude-. Again, we'll maintain altitude by changing the angle of attack of the wing.
We're NOW going about 42 knots. We're still maintaining altitude and we're still in complete control of the aircraft. It just happens to be set up the same way it would be if we were flairing out for a landing.
Quick -- about how much lift is being created by the wing?
Ok, I'm not going to say in this post whether your answer was right or wrong but lemme ask you . . . does airspeed equal lift?
Paul
547903789CFI exp. 30 Jun 2003
http://futurecam.com/skydive.html

[BenW 0]

Your changing the angle of the wing here.
On a canopy, we are set with a fixed angle of attack, unless we play with the risers. So, this situation of yours is correct in it's situation, but not, imho, analogous to the skydive wing.
Ben

[mgaillar 0]

I'm no flight instructor or aeronautical engineer...in fact, I don't know squat about aerodynamics of a wing and I am only now learning the aerodynamics of a canopy. However, the numerous resources I have read and/or listened to, all claim the same.....forward speed converts to lift, particularly when flaring. Therefore I assume more speed equals more lift. I also read about basic aerodynamics from The Book of Canopy Control by Bryan Burke (http://www.skydiveaz.com/resources/book_canopy.htm). Chapter one, third paragraph........
"A canopy produces lift in two ways. The form of the wing itself produces some lift. Wings are
shaped so that air must flow faster over the top of the wing than the bottom. When the velocity of
air increases, its pressure decreases. This creates a low pressure area on the top of the wing, and a
corresponding higher pressure below. Thus the wing is "lifted" towards the low pressure area."
Makes sense to me that the more airspeed the less pressure on the top of the wing and more pressure on the bottom, which in-turn creates lift.
Like I said....just info I have read/heard about.
Incidently, Burke's "book" has some cool info in it.
Blues to you all.
Peace!
Matt
http://www.skydiveorange.com

[RemiAndKaren 0]

all things being kept equal, if you increase the speed, you will increase the lift.
If you decrease the angle of attack, you'll increase the lift.
Thats why when you land, you apply brakes, hence reducing the effective angle of attack of the canopy, creating the same lift with less and less speed.
I think we're all splitting hairs here....
Remi
Muff 914

[Slappie 9]

I have to agree with Kelli on this one. I started my skydiving on July 14th 2001 with a tandem jump. I've now completed the AFP Student Program at Skydive Spaceland. I think it is a very progressive DZ. All the students were jumping Javelin containers with Sabre mains and PD Reserves w/AAD & RSL's. My wing loading on my first AFP Jump was 1.2 I weigh 175 + 25 gear = 200 otd on a Sabre 170 ZP Canopy. Now do you think this is unsafe? I think it is a very progressive way to teach new students. If your JM feels your not ready to fly these types & sizes then he has the right to make you fly something bigger. Spaceland has sizes ranging from a 290 down to a Sabre150. Depending on your size and your flight ability. I was a natural at skydiving and canopy control. I've only got 37 jumps so far. I'm still loading my Silhouette170 at close to 1.2 I've also made a few jumps on a Sabre2 150 and I loaded it at 1.33 I'm a very conservitive canopy pilot. I'm not wanting to "swoops" snap hookit" I'm wanting to have fun and I am! HUGE MONSTER canopies I'm sorry. I think I was taught the best way for the future of this sport. I wasn't caudled, my hand wasn't held and I was SAFELY TAUGHT how to do things the right way with the latest equipment at the time. Why teach a student on 10 year old equipment when they are going to be trying to buy "newer" equipment when they finish the courses? After all this is a sport of ADULTS I think {sometime I wonder} I believe in safety. I also believe it is pushed to the point no one is learning anything. You have to push yourself and the envelope sometimes to see how far you can go and what there is to learn. I'm not saying everyone should do this. It's what has worked for me. Now I've also seen some students and even skydivers that have 100's of jumps I do not think need to be in the sport.
Sorry for the rant this is all only my .02
My New Website with 24hr Chat

[skreamer 1]

Quote

I was a natural at skydiving and canopy control. I've only got 37 jumps so far.

LMFAO

[Slappie 9]

ALright skreamer, let me clarify. I was a very fast student. I am in no way saying I know everything at all. What I was saying was that the skills needed to keep myself and everyone around me safe came naturaly.
My New Website with 24hr Chat

[jfields 0]

Quote

skills needed to keep myself and everyone around me safe came naturaly.

Who has a broken collarbone?
Justin
My Homepage

[Slappie 9]

Quote

Who has a broken collarbone?

"Beer Light" Accident nothing to do with canopy control or flight.
My New Website with 24hr Chat

[jfields 0]

Quote

"Beer Light" Accident nothing to do with canopy control or flight.

They both have to do with impacting the ground, which gave you some difficulty.
Justin
My Homepage

[quade 3]

Nope.
Canopies are wings and we can change the angle of attack in several ways.
Paul
http://futurecam.com/skydive.html

[freeflyguy 0]

Quade. intersting spin man.
I am not a CFI. and I only have 11 hours, but your cessna analogy doesn't quite work with a parachute. What we fly is more like a B-2 bomber than a 152. We have no tail. Ya we can change angle of attack, and we can change the chord, but what we can't do is add thrust. There is no slow flight mode on our canopies Really, a parachute only has lift, drag and weight. We pretty much can only use weight to increase speed, which on a parachute, results in greater lift :). But you knew that.

[quade 3]

Guess what? I wasn't going to mention it, but it's SPECIFICALLY Bryan Burke's book (leaflet?) that I'm refering to.
There are SEVERAL points upon which he is -entirely- wrong.
The most basic of which is airspeed equals lift.
Now lemme explain a couple of things. Some of the folks on the professional swoop circuit -may- be a wonderful canopy pilots. They -may- have an amazing instictual understanding of what can be done with toggles, risers and shifting body weight.
These people I liken to birds. Yes, they can fly, but they probably -shouldn't- be writing texts on aerodynamics.
Wanna read something a little more precise and -way- more accurate?
Try THIS.
Specifically . . . Airfoils and Airflow
Paul
http://futurecam.com/skydive.html

[quade 3]

A wing is a wing. You fly the wing.
No slow flight mode? Really? How do YOU land?
The ONLY thing that differs in the analogies is that with a parachute you can't add energy into the system. You start out with some potential energy, convert it to some kinetic energy and manage that energy with changes in angle of attack. Same as a glider. Other than that . . . a wing is a wing.
Paul
http://futurecam.com/skydive.html

[quade 3]

Quote

If you decrease the angle of attack, you'll increase the lift.
Thats why when you land, you apply brakes, hence reducing the effective angle of attack of the canopy, creating the same lift with less and less speed.
I think we're all splitting hairs here....
Remi
Muff 914

This is almost EXACTLY wrong. Unbelievable!
So much for the concept of basics being covered while still on student status!
Paul
http://futurecam.com/skydive.html

[freeflyguy 0]

It's raining, so what the heck
I mean slow flight mode in the cessna sense. Where you hang on the power of the prop. That is what you where talking about when you mentioned flying at 42 knots.
And ya, we cant add thrust, but that is a huge difference.
No, the extra speed doesn't really change the angle of attack, if you look at that term correctly. At full flight, the wing is trimmed for a certain speed. It will always seek that speed, same as a cessna. As you increase the speed with the dive, the wing, trimmed for a certain speed, seeks that speed, so the extra speed is burned off in lift that carries you back up, or out of the dive arc, until it reaches it's trimmed flying speed.
A wing is a wing, and aerodynamics are some pretty rigid laws, But we don't have an engine, or tail.