Stiletto vs Sabre

[LukeOliver 0]

Why is a Stiletto allegedly "less forgiving" than a Sabre of the same size?

[AggieDave 6]

It has to do with how the canopies turn.

A Stiletto has a flatter glide plane then the Sabre, so that's actually fairly forgiving, BUT a toggle turn can drop a Stiletto out of the sky. Imagine someone under a lightly loaded Sabre screwing up a turn low to the ground. They might be able to pull it out. Now imagine that same scenerio with a Stiletto. By the time they realize they screwed up, they might have already rapidly decelerated.

Also has to do with opening characteristics. With the elliptical shape and the flatter glide plane, the Stiletto is much more prone to very wild line diving line twists. That's not really something that a low time jumper may know how to deal with correctly.

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

[BluDvn222 0]

Kind of surprised to see one of my old instructors asking that question.

"How do you like my groin to your foot style?"

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Kind of surprised to see one of my old instructors asking that question

I didn't even look at the profile before I answered. I feel stupid now.

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

[JJohnson 0]

I have heard some people accuse the Sabre of having the potential of collapsing if under loaded, perhaps making it a poor choice for students.

Any thoughts there?

JJ

"Call me Darth Balls"

[LukeOliver 0]

I think it's a legitimate question. Both canopies are constructed in a similar fashion from similar materials; at similar sizes, they both require a two stage flare and both will hurt you bad if you give them a heap of toggle close to the ground. And so on...

What I'm looking for is "Stiletto's elliptical shape makes it more prone to line twists on opening" or other evidence.

Question is asked because I'm not sure the current wisdom is accurate!

L.

PS Scott, I'm not that old!!!

[BluDvn222 0]

I think I see where you're coming from, and I'm certainly not going to chime in with little experience and none on a stiletto. But....Isn't it pretty well excepted that most elipticals, well at least Stilettos and simlar canopies, will dive more on a turn than a Sabre? I don't know, but I would like to know if there is reason to question the reality of this.

BTW, Say HI to EVERYBODY at Nagambie!!!!! Man I wish I could be back in OZ.

"How do you like my groin to your foot style?"

[Kris 0]

Quote

I think it's a legitimate question. Both canopies are constructed in a similar fashion from similar materials; at similar sizes, they both require a two stage flare and both will hurt you bad if you give them a heap of toggle close to the ground. And so on...

What I'm looking for is "Stiletto's elliptical shape makes it more prone to line twists on opening" or other evidence.

Question is asked because I'm not sure the current wisdom is accurate!

I don't understand where you get the part about being constructed in a similar fashion from. The planform on both canopies is remarkably different. About the only thing they share in common is size and fabric type.

I'm not going to touch the "two-stage" flare part because I put that right up there with Bigfoot and Loch Ness Monster. But I will agree that both canopies require a dynamic flare, as does every pretty much every other canopy.

I have jumped both Sabre's and Stiletto's in the same size. The Stiletto didn't have as much forward speed as the Sabre, but the difference in altitude lost during a toggle or riser turn was quite significant on the Stiletto. From my perception, I would say at least 30-45% greater. Also, the speed of the canopy as it came out of the turn appeared to be higher on the Stiletto than on the Sabre.

I have found that the Stiletto is also much more unforgiving of bad body position on opening. The Stiletto was much easier to turn via the harness so that may be the answer for that. Couple the easier harness turns with a longer opening on the Stiletto and you get a higher probable incidence of line twists on opening.

Now, the shape can be addressed as it is common knowledge that a tapered wing will turn much faster and respond quite differently as opposed to a traditional square wing. This is true in aircraft and in canopies.

I don't think you're going to find actual hard numbers for the questions you have asked as I doubt they exist. What does exist is knowledge gleaned from thousands of jumpers who have jumped those canopies. That knowledge is what we use today. There is a reason that PD used to require a signed waiver and 500 jumps experience before selling someone a Stiletto.

Kris

Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and
Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™

[LukeOliver 0]

Quote

I'm not going to touch the "two-stage" flare part because I put that right up there with Bigfoot and Loch Ness Monster. But I will agree that both canopies require a dynamic flare, as does every pretty much every other canopy.

(ahem) Dynamic flare, Progressive flare, two segment flare. As you note, two stage does not accurately reflect the process.

[LukeOliver 0]

Quote

I don't understand where you get the part about being constructed in a similar fashion from. The planform on both canopies is remarkably different. About the only thing they share in common is size and fabric type.

Yep; constructed in a similar fashion What is it about their shape, line lengths, angle of attack, etc that makes a Stiletto less forgiving?

The PD Education document on the Stiletto says:

Quote

...The result is similar to what can be achieved with a Sabre, but is a little less forgiving of poor technique than the Sabre, especially in the case of over controlling. It is particularly
less forgiving of errors in maintaining heading at the time of touchdown. It is also less forgiving
of overflaring, since its stall is sharper.

It's probably /all/ in here -
but I'm curious to hear what people have to say without quoting from the book. Your perspective has already helped

[mikeat10500 10]

I jumped a stiletto 150(a few times) @170lbs and found it smooth, easy to center, and would generate
ample lift on a smooth flare! I remember thinking this
might make a nice student canopy when underloaded at bit! I have not jumped enough sabers to comment on them.

-----------------------------------
Mike Wheadon B-3715,HEMP#1
Higher Expectations for Modern Parachutists.

[PhreeZone 15]

Stilettos are unstable in turbulence when underloaded. Watch them accourdian next time at a DZ and there is some turbulence.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[ianmdrennan 2]

Just about any canopy is unstable in turbulence. Any ram air parachute will become unstable when the air is disturbed, it's just a matter of how much (type of disturbance and how dramatic it was).

I really don't believe underloading a stilletto will make it more prone to the effects of turbulence, but I'd just chat to someone from PD if you have concerns about it - they'll be able to give a better answer than most of us here.

Blue skies
Ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[stilettodude 0]

I "LUUUV" my stiletto! Sorry i couldn't help myself lol.

"HOW LOW CAN YOU GO?"

[mikeat10500 10]

Quote

Stilettos are unstable in turbulence when underloaded. Watch them accourdian next time at a DZ and there is some turbulence.

Or overloaded, or optimal loading, the key here is
turbulence.
The reliable old Boeing 737-200 has been known to
take a face plant after encountering " turbulence".

-----------------------------------
Mike Wheadon B-3715,HEMP#1
Higher Expectations for Modern Parachutists.

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

Or overloaded, or optimal loading, the key here is
turbulence.

OK.

However, Stilettos are PARTICULARLY unstable even in light turbulence when underloaded.

There are canopies that are better then others in turbulence, and there are canopies that are worse then others in turbulence. A lightly loaded Stiletto is definately in the latter group.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[mikeat10500 10]

However, Stilettos are PARTICULARLY unstable even in light turbulence when underloaded.

You are more than likely 100% correct, my hi-performance canopy experience is very limited,
I did find the stiletto" I jumped" to be sweet!
Q. Do you think there is any advantage with the
Saber(1)...ie: more forgiving to inputs,light wing loads, turbulence, etc?

-----------------------------------
Mike Wheadon B-3715,HEMP#1
Higher Expectations for Modern Parachutists.

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

I did find the stiletto" I jumped" to be sweet!

The one I jump at a 1.5 wingloading IS sweet!

Quote

Q. Do you think there is any advantage with the Saber(1)...ie: more forgiving to inputs,light wing loads, turbulence, etc?

Yes. The Saber 1 and 2 are both significantly more forgiving to strong inputs at all wingloadings. Everything else being equal, a given toggle stroke will give a shallower dive, and a dive at the same angle will have a slower speed.

They are less likely to buckle in turbulence in light wingloadings then Stiletos.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[btucker 0]

Hey Luke, I would say:
1.Less forgiving of sub-optimal body position on opening.
2.Hideous altitude loss if line twisted and spinning.
3.Quicker turn rate and higher descent rate while turning.
4.Smaller control range.
5.Tendency to keep turning when put into a turn.
6.Greater sensitivity to harness movement.
7.[Deep] Stalls may not be recoverable.

To the skygod these things are assets or can be neglected, whereas to a novice they are gear fear.

OTOH:
Perhaps the perception is because:
1)Stiletto's on average are loaded higher than a Sabre. So not many jumpers would have personal experience on same area canopies.
2)Maybe, in the “right hands” a Stiletto would be more forgiving. The loaded Stiletto could be recovered out of the corner better than a Sabre of the same area. The Stiletto could be manovered around that [unseen] landing hazard. The Stiletto would flair better when landing down wind. ...
3) Sabres are no longer sexy, where Stiletto's still can pull. "My first canopy was a Sabre so they must be for novices regardless of size and loading."

Blues Benno

[billvon 2,442]

>I have heard some people accuse the Sabre of having the potential
> of collapsing if under loaded, perhaps making it a poor choice for
> students.

That's true of the Stiletto, not the Sabre. I once jumped a Stiletto 190 that, at my weight, was dangerously unstable; we used a Sabre 230 for years in our student program with no problems.

[tbostick 0]

I seriously doubt it. Check this out... I flew a canopy loaded at 0.45/ft^2 once. How many people have done that?

That was probably my scariest jump ever.

[SkymonkeyONE 3]

PLENTY of times, dude. My work canopy when I was in the army was 375 square feet. I only weigh a bit over a buck and a half, so when I was jumping hollywood I was loading at that or less.

Chuck

[BMFin 0]

Quote

I seriously doubt it. Check this out... I flew a canopy loaded at 0.45/ft^2 once. How many people have done that?

That was probably my scariest jump ever.

On my 1st jump ( IAD ) I loaded my canopy about 0.5. It was a 280 navigator. No problems at all.

EDIT: learning to spell english

[JJohnson 0]

Like I said, it was something I had heard and was wondering what the story was.

A Stil 190 at your weight is dangerously unstable? I seem to rememer you weighing at about 170, am I that bad at guessing weight? What is your exit weight?

JJ

"Call me Darth Balls"

[RevJim 0]

Note: I do not have a great deal of jumps, but can give a newer jumpers perspective to this.

Quote

...The result is similar to what can be achieved with a Sabre, but is a little less forgiving of poor technique than the Sabre, especially in the case of over controlling. It is particularly
less forgiving of errors in maintaining heading at the time of touchdown. It is also less forgiving
of overflaring, since its stall is sharper.

I downsized much too fast, and have since upsized a few times, but here is my thoughts.

I went down through the Sabres. 210, 190, 170, and then a 150. I put a few jumps on the 150, and then was offered a gear deal that was hard to pass up. A Stiletto 120 at a great price. I bit. Before I bought the rig, I got some canopy coaching. I made a number of Stiletto 120 jumps, and found the openings to be extremely body position dependent. It showed my just how bad I was. The Sabres always opend smooth and on heading. Not so with the Stiletto.

Flying the Stiletto was like going from a Cessna 182 to a King Air. No comparison. The Stiletto was much quicker in the turns, on both risers and toggles. This gave me a "twitchy" feeling. Shorter toggle stroke to produce the same turn, ect.

Landings are where things got quite interesting. The Sabre is actually very forgiving of an uneven flare. It drifts a bit, but it's easy to keep "wings level". Not so with the Stiletto. My landings with the Stiletto, all of which were straight in, needed to be perfect. On a couple they were not. An inch or less difference between left and right toggles during the flare gave a pronounced drift, and required quick and smooth action to correct. A few times I wasn't quick enough, and a PLF/tuck and roll saved me from broken bones. Over an inch of difference had me going from an into the wind landing to a crosswind landing while desperately trying to keep from breaking every bone in my body.

I ended up deciding the Stiletto was not for me, yet. I settled on a Sabre 135, which served me well last year. I have since gotten rid of that rig and gone up to a Sabre 150. The 150 seems dog slow compared to what I've been flying, but it's still a fun canopy, and slow is not necessarily a bad thing all the time.

Oh, yea. The last time I checked, I was between 200 and 210 out the door.

It's your life, live it!
Karma
RB#684 "Corcho", ASK#60, Muff#3520, NCB#398, NHDZ#4, C-33989, DG#1