Pilote Chute question...

[fudd 0]

Best spent money:
New kill line pilote, or new velcroless risers with dive loops?
What size should I go for if I buy a new pc?

Just some of my thoughts:
Ok, so now I got myself a new canopy (hornet 170)
Will it be ok to still use my old pc. It's a plain and old f111. I suspect it will have less pull force than a new zp killine pc, and thus giving me better more consistent openings (well as long as it doesn't rip an and give me a baglock). The brand new lines are quite slippery, less pull force from the pc will reduce the possibility of a line dump.

The advantages with new risers with dive loops are quite obvious...

Opinions apreacheated

There are only 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

[gus 1]

Hmm tricky one but I'd go for the velcroless risers since they're more of a safety issue (?) and on a 170 a non-collapsable pc isn't going to make such a huge difference to the performance of the canopy.

Gus

OutpatientsOnline.com

[riggerrob 562]

It depends upon how heavily he is loading his new canopy, but my bias would be to buy the kill-line pilotchute.
When I first installed a collapsible pilotchute on my Shrike 220, there was a noticeable improvement in glide and landings.

Dive loops can be sewn onto any old set of risers.
But I do not understand how Velcro-less risers are a safety issue.
Please explain.

[weid14 0]

i'd get a new Kill line PC... I must say this, however, I noticed better openings for some reason using an "F-111" PC vs Zpo. you might want to think about that before ordering (I think PD is recommending non-zpo PC's).

Velcro isn't terrible as long as you treat it correctly i.e. put the toggles back right away, and keep your steering lines away from the hook.

[gus 1]

Quote

But I do not understand how Velcro-less risers are a safety issue. Please explain.

I would have thought that well designed velcro-less risers are much less prone to premature toggle release. Velcro on a rig does not by definition make the rig unsafe but it's my perception that a poorly maintained velcro-less rig (and there are many I'm sure) is safer than a poorly maintained velcro rig, including its risers.

Disclaimer: As a general rule I don't really know what I'm talking about!
Gus

OutpatientsOnline.com

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"But I do not understand how Velcro-less risers are a safety issue.
Please explain. "
My take on this...Velcro is there to retain the toggles, when it gets fuzzy it doesn't do it's job all that well, and premature brake toggle firings are the result. Therefore the velcro requires maintenance, and you know how good us jumpers are at keeping our maintenance regimes up to date..

One other (seasonal and/or geographic) aspect is the fact that the velcro, especially on PC bridles and brakes can get wet, if it gets wet then freezes, then some minor drama can ensue.

Neither of the above 'failure modes' are in themselves particularly critical, but they may start the chain that can spoil your day.

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[fudd 0]

Quote

I noticed better openings for some reason using an "F-111" PC vs Zpo

I've did some reading about pc and openings and it was explained that a zp pc would pull harder, almost stopping the canopy untill you reach line strech and you accelarate the canopy again.
http://www.performancedesigns.com/docs/hrdopn.pdf

I think I first will stay with my old pc. The improvement from my old clipper will be so significant so that I can save the joy of even better flying characteristics to later. Also I will probably need some time to get to know my canopy and how to pack those greate openings.

I will innocently give my girlfriend the direction to skydive shop and tell her that i want a pc for my birthday :)

hmm....now mini risers or regular...

There are only 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

[ChileRelleno 0]

My first question is "Why didn't you order it with a new bag, bridle and new ZP PC?" Get the new ZP collapsible PC, You cannot count on the "plain and old" f111 PC. To me this is much more an area of concern than new risers with toys. As for the possibility of line dump due to increased snatch/pull force, simply make sure your stows are long enough and that your bands are tight, double'em if you have to.
Get the PC or dig deep and get both if the risers are old and questionable...

ChileRelleno-Rodriguez Bro#414
Hellfish#511,MuffBro#3532,AnvilBro#9, D24868

[bobsoutar 0]

[I noticed better openings for some reason using an "F-111" PC vs Zpo.]

Kolla told a while back that all of PDs test jumpers prefer F111 PCs. Less snatch force apparently.

[skybytch 259]

Quote

I'd go for the velcroless risers since they're more of a safety issue

I don't get this statement either.

Sure, velcro gets fuzzy if you don't keep up on it... but aren't the toggle keepers on no-velcro risers subject to wear and popped stitches?

While velcro may prematurely wear your lower steering lines if you aren't careful about stowing them, no-velcro risers often have no provision for stowing the excess line, which has caused numerous cases of stuck toggles and resultant cutaways.

Oh, and you don't need dive loops to fly with your front risers...

[fudd 0]

Quote

You cannot count on the "plain and old" f111 PC.

Why not? As long as it's found airworthy by a rigger and not got any rips or tears it should work fine.
My bag is just fine, why would I need a new bag?

Maybe I should have ordered a new PC with the canopy, but I really hadn't given that area so much thought when I ordered it. Also I was a bit unsure on what type of bridle I should get for my vector2 (it has some bits of velcro on it). And I figured it was no rush.

btw, my wingloading on the my new canopy will be about 1.14

There are only 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

[drenaline 0]

go for the Kill Line PC, nobody knows but if you win a new container you will have to buy a kill line. Better buy the kill line now and you can pass it to any other container.

Quote

The advantages with new risers with dive loops are quite obvious...

I only see disadvantage, getting a finger traped on a 360 front riser hook... (happened to a friend of mine luckily he got it out just in time to back riser, toggle flare, yep he landed whiter than white).

HISPA 21
www.panamafreefall.com

[skybytch 259]

Quote

if you win a new container you will have to buy a kill line.

New containers come with main d-bag, bridle and pilot chute (main risers and toggles too). You can choose a standard or kill line collapsible main p/c with nearly every container on the market. A few container manufacturers include the kill line option in the base price, on most it is an extra cost option (prices vary - between $55 - 80 extra). Even if it's an extra cost option, adding a kill line p/c to a new container is less expensive than buying a new p/c.

[drenaline 0]

Yeah was thinking about that after posting it, I think would of been better "if you buy a used container that doesn't includes a kill line..."

thanks for the correction Lisa.

HISPA 21
www.panamafreefall.com

[SkyMissy 0]

Also, you probably won't be needing those dive loops with a big ol' pilot chute up there adding drag. Not that you shouldn't learn to fly with them, but the speed they generate will be much less than with a kill-line PC. I guess I'd say get whichever you want first, and the other ASAP.

________________________________________________
Mike

[weid14 0]

with the advent of velcroless toggles, I have seen more brake firings. Of course there have been design changes to overcome some (most) of the issues.

It is true though, why bother with dive loops if you are still on the low performance PC?

[billvon 2,471]

>New kill line pilote, or new velcroless risers with dive loops?

No question - kill line PC. Using front risers with a non-collapsible PC is kind of working against yourself.

>I suspect it will have less pull force than a new zp killine pc . . .

Not if it's small (22 inches?) - go with your canopy manufacturer's recommendations.

[cobaltdan 0]

"I've did some reading about pc and openings and it was explained that a zp pc would pull harder, almost stopping the canopy untill you reach line strech and you accelarate the canopy again. "

there are alot of unfounded bs tales in this industry. this is one.

a zp pilot can be made to pull what every you want. as can an f111. it is a function of their area. we have recorded force from pilots ranging in size from 28" -18". we recommend zp pilots because the fabric does not deteriorate the way a f111 does. ultimately they last more of less the same number of jumps (because the kill line shrinks) but the f111 will not be consistant over its usable life.

go zp kill line collapsable not f111 and size properly. properly being the canopy manufacturers specific recommendation, not the rig manufacturers standard recomendation.

sincerely,

dan<><>
ww.extremefly.com

Daniel Preston <><>
atairaerodynamics.com (sport)
atairaerospace.com (military)

[HeatherB 0]

Quote

go zp kill line collapsable not f111 and size properly. properly being the canopy manufacturers specific recommendation, not the rig manufacturers standard recomendation.

We offer ZP or F-111 PC's, in various sizes. Often people request a certain size PC and so long as it's within reason and we do not believe it will cause problems (whether it is PC hesitation, PC's in tow, or hard openings) we will go ahead with the request. If no certain size is specified we will go by our charts. We've done our own testing and our recommendations should be taken into account.

I do agree that a "standard size" PC that comes with all the sizes of a manufacturer's rigs isn't the way to go. That would certainly make production easier but we find it's better to have different size PC's for different size rigs.

Dan, I'm honestly curious: Why exactly would a customer with, for example, a Cobalt 170 and a 28" ZP PC have brisk openings? (info taken from your website's FAQ)

Every other canopy manufacturer we've talked to says a 28" ZP or 30" F-111 is fine for their 170's (or similar sized canopy). Why does the Cobalt require a smaller PC than other canopies do?

No disrespect meant, I'm just curious.

blue skies,
Heather

[Danger 0]

I have around 1000 jumps on velcroed(?) toggles and never had a problem.

Comparing that with 750+ jumps on velcroless toggles, and around 40 toggle pops.

How do you figure velcro is a safety issue?

The geographical area is the same for all jumps (Toronto, Canada), so that doesn't come into play.

I have had my rigger change my velcro on the rig that needs it and he has also made modifications to the other rig to stop the toggle from popping. So both have required maintenance.

And toggle pops on a loaded canopy with a couple of line twists can be a critical situation. You should see the video.

Overall both systems require a small amount of maintenance and can usually be done at a repack.

Danger

[PhreeZone 15]

What velcroless system are you using? One like the Sunpath or one like the Mirage system?

I'm looking at a new rig soon and will probally get RWS risers to match to it even if its a non RWS rig since I like their velcroless toggle system.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

I like their velcroless toggle system.

I agree with you their, the straight pin on the bottom of the toggle for the keeper is a pretty good idea, giving a secure design.

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

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

I agree with you their, the straight pin on the bottom of the toggle for the keeper is a pretty good idea, giving a secure design.

Much more important then the straight pin at the bottom, is the closed off keeper at the top.

The single biggest problem with sunpath style toggles is the open keepers. A descending slider will frequently knock a toggle loose on a harder opening.

On competing velcro-less toggle solutions, I've never had the bottom mysteriously pop out. Moreover, even if the bottom DID pop out, it wouldn't cause a malfunction unless the top came out as well. The single pin seems almost overkill . However, the top popping out due to an open keeper is a very common annoyance.

Likewise, I think the biggest advantage to having stowes for the slack brake line is that it settles the debate (on RWS toggles) over wether or not it should be stowed.

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[billbooth 10]

Velcroed toggles are old technology, and as such, had all the bugs worked out long ago. Quite frankly, they work better than most current "velcroless" designs. This is always true when technology changes. Every change you make in a parachute system results in unforseen problems. And very often these new problems are worse than the old problem you were trying to fix in the first place. (I know, I've done it before myself.) That is why you went 1,000 jumps with velcro toggles without a problem, and then had nothing but problems with your "new and improved" velcroless toggles. As you have seen this is an especially bad problem when you are dealing with something like a toggle or riser cover, for which no performance standards or TSO tests exist. Since a loose toggle can kill you, wouldn't you think it logical to write at least a minimal performance standard before trying to design a new toggle system? I hate to be blunt, but quite frankly I'm getting very frustrated watching jumpers use unsafe toggle systems. With all the problems people are having, it must be obvious by now, that some of the designers of these new velcroless toggle systems have skipped that most elemental first step of a basic performance standard.

That is why I didn't come out with velcroless toggles until I had first written such a standard, worked out at least every easily forseeable problem, and let local teams test the new design for more than a year. Premature toggle release is a serious problem. If it is happening to you, please get it fixed before you jump again.

[cobaltdan 0]

hi heather,

we have developed our own dataloggers and sensors for testing canopies. when we first started datalogging forces during deployment we noticed some interesting things. one of my primary interests and a driving force behind the development of our cobalt was safe high speed deployments.

with large pilot chutes, especially at high speeds when you datalog a jump and look at the graph of force vs time you will see a seperate peak shock from the pilot chute/line stretch to when the canopy comes out of the bag. with a cobalt you will see 3 distinct peaks: pilot chute, stage 1, stage 2.

with large pilots and high speeds the pilot shock can exceed the force of the first stage of the canopy deployment. we realized that the pilots we were using were unnecessarialy large and began testing progressively smaller sizes. first they were dumped from a pickup truck with a load link on them to record peak and steady force, then the chosen sizes were jumped. the resulting graphs of the jumps showed dramatic reduction of the first peak. based on this testing our recommended sizes for our canopies up to 135 is 22" zp, and 24" above.

note: on a recent tandem test drop we recorded peak force from the drogue at line stretch of 26g where as the max canopy force on opening was 6.4 g.

anyway so to answer your question we are very safety oriented when it comes to high speed deployments. we routinely demonstrate deployments at speeds that would kill you on competing canopies. as we market our canopies on its ability to be safer in the advent of a high speed deployment it is important that they are used within our tested and designed limits, i.e. using a properly size pilot chute.

sincerely,

dan
www.extremefly.com

Daniel Preston <><>
atairaerodynamics.com (sport)
atairaerospace.com (military)