B. Germains WL chart

[Bartje 0]

I do think you are missing my point,
I prefer that students fly a 100% of their skills with their canopy, it does not mean that 100% of their skills is 100% of the canopy (limits).
When those % are not both 100% than there should not downsize.

The 100% of my canopy is more than I need, I’m happy with the 75% I use to fly it. I’m not planning downsizing again. I would have to fly with a WL that is to high for every kind of canopy to get more performance out of it.
I can take a Velo88 to get to 2.1wl or a Stil.107 at 1.9wl but than I have to fly it always at 100% for the same moves, speed and landings. The 101% (what you think is not possible but I can assure you it is) what gives me not any margin in performance for those situations where I need it.

As I read your comments it is good that you feel happy with your canopy and that you have the feeling you have it always 100% under control. Every canopy pilot has that feeling but that makes it dangerous. I’m not afraid to say that I’m a little bit afraid from my canopy because I know what it can do but I know at the same moment that I can fly it where I want it to fly and how it fly’s. If I land hard or make a mistake it is me and not my canopy. A hard landing with a wl from 2.35 or 2.1 or 1.9 stay’s hard and can hurt you a lot.

Quote

… the canopy is in tirm, and the pilot is adhering to safe flight manuvers.

It is just to get to the 100% that pilots are doing unsafe manuvers or take risks.
That is for me the 101% pushing yourself over the limit.

Charts are a good guideline but not good as rule.

A FreeFly Gypsy

[chrisgr 0]

You have demonstrated a good understanding and respect for the canopies that you choose to fly. Every jumper needs this same knowledge and respect for their canopies.

Many of our student programs provide some form of basic canopy control, but none could provide the level of knowledge and training that you have acquired during your 10+ years of skydiving.

For those new skydivers who cannot learn these survival instincts quickly enough, the w/l restriction may help protect them from the dangers of rapid downsizing.

[Bartje 0]

I agree with davelepka on the point for the students, I never disagree with him.

Canopy piloting is much more than guiding students; somebody bringing the skills to fly a canopy can not put in rules, it is more putting yourself into the head from the student and try to understand what they want. Here is a guideline a good thing, just to look who you have in front of you and than you can go further.
There are people ready to fly a smaller canopy than what the charts says and there are people never ready to fly a smaler canopy. It is al in the head, for student and coach.

Greetz

A FreeFly Gypsy

[davelepka 4]

Quote

There are people ready to fly a smaller canopy than what the charts says

Tell me who they are before we (they) find out the hard way they're really not ready to fly smaller canopies, and I'll drop the whole thing.

[Bartje 0]

The best example I can think about is a student who I had a few years ago.
Tommy Jammar is his name. Before he finished the static line course he had already buy him a rig with a 175sqft canopy in it. Tommy has easely 90kg (198Lbs).
Way to fast I thought but we could not talk him out of it. I was surprised that he did well with his canopy. Tommy had already a good idea about aerodynamics but not even 100 jumps before he did buy himself a Sabre170. Nice canopy he said but it did not give him the things he wants to do and quite fast he did buy a Spectre135, at that time he had not 250jumps. A nice canopy but like you can guess, not doing the things he want to do. Next step was a Vengance120. The ideal wing load he said but he did not like the openings. Next step Velocity120. That was it and he jumped 200jumps with this canopy. I thought he was now happy with his canopy but no, next step an Fx89. He was one of the first CrossBraced canopies ever to jump at Maubeuge.
At this moment he did realise that his WL was too high and he did lose performance. Finally I did buy the Fx89 from him. At that time I had about 800jumps and Tommy not even 500.
Than there is Ivan, Ivan was Tommy’s skydive buddy. He did a progression not that fast as Tommy but he was jumping an Vengance120 (his weight is 80kg or 176Lbs) before he had 500 jumps.
Those two students were well guided and they did well. At this moment I have other students who are jumping, when you follow the chart, with too small canopies but they do fine until now. Even last week at Z’Hills I was with Max. Max has about 500 jumps and flies a Crossfire2 109. He had fun at the pond. His feet in the water and all landings were good.
If you need more examples mail me,
I’m sure that the chart is a good guideline but as a rule it takes some student out of it.
The examples I wrote are 3 out of 10. The other 7 where not ready to jump the canopy they want but it takes an other 300 jumps if you look at the chart and I’m sure that they are ready in the next 100jumps.
I guide the people who wants to fly extreme canopies.
I guide as well people who want to learn more from the current canopy,
It is the choice from the individual, I’m not pushing people into the extreme canopy flight, let that be clear, I try to guide them as good as I can.

Than there is canopy size. As I understand you are jumping a Stil.107, do you realize how much it shrink when you do a 180° or 360° turn before landing? It shrinks almost 25%. That is the actual canopy size you fly at that moment. Take a Cross Braced canopy, it shrinks about 12%. Is it calculated in the chart?

A FreeFly Gypsy

[PhreeZone 14]

Quote

Than there is canopy size. As I understand you are jumping a Stil.107, do you realize how much it shrink when you do a 180° or 360° turn before landing? It shrinks almost 25%. That is the actual canopy size you fly at that moment. Take a Cross Braced canopy, it shrinks about 12%. Is it calculated in the chart?

I'm not sure where you are getting this information at since I've never heard it from any of the manufactors, factory sponsored reps, seminars or aeronautical engineers. I have heard of top skin distortion being about those percentages but thats a huge difference between distortion and shrinking.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[davelepka 4]

Quote

Than there is canopy size. As I understand you are jumping a Stil.107, do you realize how much it shrink when you do a 180° or 360° turn before landing? It shrinks almost 25%. That is the actual canopy size you fly at that moment. Take a Cross Braced canopy, it shrinks about 12%. Is it calculated in the chart?

First off, I'm not sure what you mean by my canopy 'shrinks' when I swoop, but whatever it does, it works for me so I'll hang on to it.

Your point about taking 'shrinkage', and how you assert that an X-Brace will shrink less than a conventional canopy is irrelevant to this discussion. Even if what you say is true, the chart ends at 1000 jumps, after which, you are free to do as you please. There are vey few instances where a pilot is ready for an x-brace canopy before 1000 jumps.

Furthermore, you seem to be saying that while swooping, my 100 sq ft Stiletto, I'm only using 75 sq ft. If I had a 100 sq ft Velo, I'd be using 88 sq ft in a swoop. This is a problem how? If a pilot should start jumping an x-brace before he has 1000 jumps, the chart will give them more usable sq footage than a non braced canopy, as per your assertion. Again, whats the problem with that? You think a sub 1000 jump jumper doesn;t need every bit of help they can get when jumping an x-braced canopy?

As far as your students go, their stories don't make me rethink my position, they make me think your instruction is lacking something, such as proper risk management.


These guys knew they were pushing it (as did everyone around them). Why would you trust a guy who is knowingly taking these types of chances, to not take other chances while under canopy? He has proven his decision making doen not err on the side of caution, quite the opposite. This would seem all the more reason to watch him, and what he's jumping, more carefully.

Take a Biff who jumps a conservative WL, and has taken a canopy control course, and has proven to make sound, cautions choices under his 170, which is at the high limit of the chart for his experience. Biff wants to buy a 150 when he has the jumps, and one is for sale at the DZ for a good price. The owner has a buyer out of state, but would rather deal with a local jumper, but wants to sell it right away. If Biff wanted to put a jump or two on the canopy, to see if he liked, and then he could buy it, and return to his 170 unitl his jump numbers came up, this is where you could make an exception. Provided it was only for a jump or two, and the weather was favorable, this would be a 'good' risk to take. Allowing a young hotshot who doesn't listen to anyone, and has proven this with his equipment choices, to jump canopies way too small and too aggressive for him is not a 'good' risk. It's stupid.

[davelepka 4]

Quote

I have heard of top skin distortion being about those percentages but thats a huge difference between distortion and shrinking.

Oh but how great would it be to fly a 107 back from a long spot, and then swoop an 89. That would be something.

[chrisgr 0]

As your students were making their canopy progressions, did they demonstrate basic survival skills on one canopy before downsizing to another?

Perhaps they can swoop a pond, but can they perform these skills …

- flat turn 90 degrees at 50 feet
- flare turn at least 45 degrees
- land crosswind and in no wind
- land reliably within a 10 meter circle
- initiate a high performance landing with double front risers and front riser turn to landing
- land on slight uphills and downhills
- land with rear risers

The published list is an excellent way to measure if someone is really ready to downsize ...

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/safety/detail_page.cgi?ID=47

[Bartje 0]

Quote

- flat turn 90 degrees at 50 feet
- flare turn at least 45 degrees
- land crosswind and in no wind
- land reliably within a 10 meter circle
- initiate a high performance landing with double front risers and front riser turn to landing
- land on slight uphills and downhills
- land with rear risers

Stop thinking in circles, start thinking in lines.
For the rest it is al basic canopy control before you can move on, I agree.

A FreeFly Gypsy

[Bartje 0]

The moment when you are comming out of the turn your canopy is almost 25% smaller. From the moment when you give input your canopy wil regain its planform. Not 100% but for about 95%.
And Yeah, comming back with a 107 and start your swoop with a 89 is real.

Look at the swooppics from convential canopies and braced canopies. When the pic is made from front you see that your convential canopy is like a harmonica, more than usualy.

A good moment to feel the lesser surface with a non cros braced canopy is the moment that sometimes you feel like turbulence on your canopy the moment you give input. The diferance between a deep flare and a not so deep flare with the same canopy.

A FreeFly Gypsy

[Bartje 0]

you are right,
here is the info from Icarus: http://www.icaruscanopies.com/canopies/EXTreme_FX/index.htm
they write less surface (for me shrinking) in context of distorsion.

A FreeFly Gypsy

[davelepka 4]

Like I said, even if what you say is 100% factual, the phenomenon only helps to give the jumper more effective square footge on landing (if they should be on a x-brace). It's a win/win situation.

[chrisgr 0]

Forgive me, but I'm not sure if you answered the question. In addition to swooping, have your students mastered the survival skills on the list?

You should consider that when someone makes an off-field landing, they will not be looking at any lines -- or circles -- on the ground. However, being able to consistently land within a 10 meter circle is a better representation of a canopy pilot's ability to safely land in tight areas and is still a well-established standard for licensing in the US.

[Bartje 0]

The 1000 jumps needed to fly a cross braced canopy let me remind the days when the Blue track, blue track pro and stil. where new.
The manufactors did say you need 1000 jumps before you can jump one of those canopies. The same for the Bat Wing and even the Pd from Pd. It seems like yesterday that my aff instructer was on the dropzone with an Stil. 150 in his rig. He could not jump the canpopy from the chief instructer because it was a new and fast canopy.

A FreeFly Gypsy

[Bartje 0]

thinking in landinglines is better than a circle.
When you do PL, CRW, round canopy jumps or any kind of non swoop landings than you have to think on a landinspot, for some it is a circle.
When you start swooping you have to start thinking in lines.
And yes, even far away from the dropzone you have to think like that. Somebody who thinks in circles to land his canopy do not see the things (obstructions) in front the landingarea. You can cal it as wel object fixation and that is not good.

You talk about survival skills, I called it canopy skills.
Sure you need those skills, every canopypilot has to, questions is. When I look at the chart then I say you need to show those skills from jump 201, then the real progression start.
Like I said, the chart is a good guideline.

A FreeFly Gypsy

[davelepka 4]

So what you're saying is that, back when these canopies were new, AND OPEN CANOPY INCIDENTS WERE INFREQUENT, the manufacturers had experience reccomendations in place, and people had some respect for them.

Years later, WHEN OPEN CANOPY INCIDENTS ARE A HUGE PROBLEM, jumpers seem to disregard the manufacturers reccomendations.

Do you see a connection?

[chrisgr 0]

During an off-field landing into a tight area, most jumpers will not -- and should not -- execute high-performance landings as if they were on a ‘swoop course’.

Can your students perform a straight-in approach to a landing target in deep brakes and ‘sink’ their canopies onto the target?

[Bartje 0]

Yes straight-in approach, think in lines and not in circles.
You can aim to a spot but you will fly in a line.

A FreeFly Gypsy

[davelepka 4]

Quote

You can aim to a spot but you will fly in a line

But that line does end on a single spot.

I think the point that Chris is trying to make is that one of many reasons to follow a slow and methodical canopy progression is that is increases your exposure to a wider variety of situations (weather, off-field, traffic, different DZ's) as you move through the progression.

By the time you're jumping something small and fast, which may be difficult to set down in a small yard or clearing, you have a wide range of experiencees under your belt. In bypassing the progression, your students will find themselves ill prepared for basic, survival canopy piloting, which becomes increasingly more difficult as the canopy size goes down.

[Bartje 0]

Quote

So what you're saying is that, back when these canopies were new, AND OPEN CANOPY INCIDENTS WERE INFREQUENT, the manufacturers had experience recommendations in place, and people had some respect for them.

Years later, WHEN OPEN CANOPY INCIDENTS ARE A HUGE PROBLEM, jumpers seem to disregard the manufacturer’s recommendations.

Do you see a connection?

There is no more or less to disregard the manufacturer’s recommendations now then in the past. It is the evolution in thinking about parachutes.

The OPEN CANOPY INCIDENTS like you say is a problem what in my opinion is the traffic and fast and slow falling skydivers who all opens in the same minute and want all land on the same spot. Canopy collations is the big reason for accidents.
There is no simple solution for this problem but like you can guess I do have my idea for this.
The problem begins already in the airplane. Who’s exits first, RW or FreeFly.
A logic solution is to exit the RW as first and later the FreeFly. It is a good solution for separation but not for traffic. When they dropped like that, pay attention to the time what the first parachute and the last parachute lands. If you can find a drop zone where it is possible to jump first as a FreeFlyer, pay again attention in between the first and the last parachute to land. You will see that the period is bigger. The landing traffic is spread in time.
The only reason that we do not do it like that is that you can have an in air collision. Do you ever heard about an actual in air collision near you? I did not for 12 years.
An other factor is that FreeFlyers are often flying smaller canopies than RW. (On the dz’s were I jump). I need after opening 90sec, without flying extreme with my canopy, to get to the ground.
When I’m jumping after the RW I do not have a clear pad to the dz and often can not exercise my swoop. When I’m before the bigger canopies I we all have clear pad to the dz.

The perfect solution you can not determinate but the French rule is in my opinion a good one. When there is much wind the RW go’s out first. With not much wind the FreeFlyers are going first. Not for the horizontal separation but for spreading the traffic over the dropzone and try to create the safest environment.

I’m not taking any position in who exits first, as long that it stay’s the same during day it is ok for me. One element in my course is the orientation under canopy and awareness for other canopies. When you go out first or last, you always have to know where everybody is.

A FreeFly Gypsy

[davelepka 4]

Thats an interesting side track, and has been discussed at length elsewhere.

I do not have the info in front of me, but I would guess that a good portion of the open canopy incidents were single jumper events. Of the ones that were related to canopy collision, you would have to investigate further to determine the exit order and the groups from which the involved jumpers came from.

Does anyone have the fatality summary handy? How many open canopy incidents were single jumper, and how many involved collisions? Anyone? Anyone?

[PhreeZone 14]

From 1996- present there have been 42 out of 545 incidents related to canopy collisions or about 8%. Query results here

75 incidents have been due to landing accidents, 96 incidents are classified as hook/low turn incidents. There is a very low overlap rate in the classifications so lets just figure 150 incidents are under an open, functioning canopy that is flown to the death of the pilot. Thats roughly 28% of all fatalities. [urlhttp://www.skydivingfatalities.info/search.asp?MinDate=12%2F14%2F1995&MaxDate=10%2F30%2F2004&Place=&State=&Country=&Category=LOWT&MinAge=17&MaxAge=78&UnknownAge=on&MinJumps=0&MaxJumps=15000&UnknownJumps=on&AAD=&RSL=&Description=&DescriptionOperator=OR&Lessons=&LessonsOperator=OR]Low Turns[/url] and landing.

HUGE difference in the fatalities between solo incidents and collisions.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[davelepka 4]

Thanks, I knew the info was out there somewhere, but I'm much better with a canopy than I am with a computer.

An additional point is that I'm not looking to reduce only fatalities, but incidents in general. The fatalities are outrageous, but I'm sure there were far more non-fatal incidents that resulted in either permanant injuries or the jumper never jumping again. Any of the above, in my opinion, is unacceptable.

Let's get to the point where the majority of incidents are unforseen freak occurences, which would have been impossible to prevent. Now that would be something.

[Bartje 0]

Quote

Let's get to the point where the majority of incidents are unforseen freak occurences, which would have been impossible to prevent. Now that would be something.

Is that not the goal for this discussion?
As I see it, the majority incidents happens with a good canopy and bad piloting, not only bad for the pilot himself but also bad piloting from other pilots where you have to anticipate for.

During my week at Z'Hills there was even a canopy pilot who did a right turn were de briefing said you have to do a left turn last turn before landing) During my setup point I did see his canopy before me at +/- 50ft. Was it my mistake? The man was not used that there were other fast canopies before him. I can start a discussion for this but the thing is that it is not only bad piloting from yourself what can give you troubles. You can not find that in statistics. Fact is that there is too much traffic and we need to find a sollution for that.
We need an other vieuw for canopy pilots, an other vieuw on freefall (fast and slow freefall) and we have to change our mentality.

Canopy piloting is not only flying your canopy.