safire2 and crossfire2 1.6

[customguy79 0]

I know that the safire2 performance stats to fall off around 1.6 and thats where the crossfire starts to take off. I have jumped both at a 1.4 loading some time ago and really didnt notice much difference between them. I now jump a safire2 loaded to 1.6 maybe a little more. Question is if I switch to the crossfire same size will it be a noticable difference in performance since im close to what some say is the sweet spot for the xfire?
thanks in advance for the advise that comes with this.

[mircan 0]

I jumped safire 139 at ~1.5 demoed xfire of the same size. Even if it felt better in flare, dive and lighter on the front risers it was still somewhat sluggish. Then I demoed 129 at 1.6, it was much, much different and I bought it in the end. Been jumping it for the last 200+ jumps.
Now I think I need smaller, but instead I just wear weights.

dudeist skydiver #42

[customguy79 0]

thanks i will demo what will put me in the 1.5 and 1.6 and see what happens.

[Rugby82 0]

I jumped a Safire2 139 and a Xfire2 139 at 1.8 and really noticed the difference. The Safire2 started opening harder while the Xfire2 opens really soft.

When doing high-performance landings the Safire2 just isn't made for it, way too short recovery arc. The Xfire2 dives much longer. The Xfire feels a lot more twitchy when loading it t 1.8 then the Safire2.

Flaring is super for both canopies but with more speed on the landings I prefer the Xfire2.

Blue skies!

[Pendragon 1]

I regularly jump a xfire2 109 @ 1.8 and a safire2 129 @ 1.6; I've also jumped a xfire2 129.

I noticed the biggest difference going from the xfire2 129 to the 109, rather than from the safire2 of the same size.

Depending on your experience level / currency etc, if you're looking to buy I'd recommend loading the xfire2 at 1.7/1.8; maybe borrow a larger one for a few jumps?

However, both canopies execute high-performance landings nicely. I still regularly use the safire2 as a wingsuit canopy and it gives me some nice swoops; 270 degree turns and using the rears to force the plane-out. So much of this is technique. Get some local advice if you plan to downsize though.

--
BASE #1182
Muff #3573
PFI #52; UK WSI #13

[DocPop 1]

Quote

270 degree turns and using the rears to force the plane-out.

Can you explain a little more why you have to "force the plane-out"? Is this not a way of saying you are in the corner?

Please excuse me if I have misunderstood - not trying to cause trouble, just to understand!

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[Pendragon 1]

It's a technique used to raise the angle of attack on the canopy without slowing the canopy down, preventing the canopy from diving further, taking the extra speed you have and converting it into horizontal distance. Sure, you would technically be ever so slightly "in the corner" should you not use the rears, but the point at which you use them is when the pilot has swung back underneath the canopy but before the canopy itself has fully recovered to normal flight on its own (sometimes called the "roll-out" phase). It's a bit difficult to explain without showing though.

However, the internet is not the place for teaching this or similar techniques; get some good advice about how and when to use the rears when you have several hundred HP landings and you've got your 270 degree turn dialed in.

--
BASE #1182
Muff #3573
PFI #52; UK WSI #13

[DocPop 1]

Thanks for the explanation. So if I understand correctly, you are going for some kind of a sling-shot effect?

Don;t worry - I am not about to try it. I am not doing 270s and only use rears occasionally when my plane out looks good after the turn.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[BMFin 0]

Quote

It's a technique used to raise the angle of attack on the canopy without slowing the canopy down, preventing the canopy from diving further, taking the extra speed you have and converting it into horizontal distance. Sure, you would technically be ever so slightly "in the corner" should you not use the rears, but the point at which you use them is when the pilot has swung back underneath the canopy but before the canopy itself has fully recovered to normal flight on its own (sometimes called the "roll-out" phase). It's a bit difficult to explain without showing though.

However, the internet is not the place for teaching this or similar techniques; get some good advice about how and when to use the rears when you have several hundred HP landings and you've got your 270 degree turn dialed in.

I think his question was perhaps more striking than he could have guessed.

The reason why I say this is because, I also fly the XF2 109 with similar wingload. (around 1.8) I have come into the conclusion that with this canopy there is no need at all to plane out with rears. It planes out it self in such a recovery arc, that it makes it useless. IMO no plane out is needed, unless you are low. The way I see it with this canopy is that if you hit your recovery well, you only need to flare once you come out of your turn and have already plained out.

Sure one may flare the first half of his swoop with rears efficiently but this is another question, than plaining out.

However I admit, I often (on purpose) put my self a little bit low in order to have some marginal to adjust. Its so hard to hit the perfect recovery everytime, which is right at the very end of the marginal.

[DocPop 1]

Sounds like we are talking about forcing the canopy to plane out before the natural recovery arc versus extending the glide on rears after the canopy has planed out naturally.

The first would be "in the corner" (even if only slightly) and the second would not. What I am trying to understand is if Pendragon's technique is the former and, if so, is there some kind of performance advantage to that type of landing.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[BMFin 0]

Quote

Sounds like we are talking about forcing the canopy to plane out before the natural recovery arc versus extending the glide on rears after the canopy has planed out naturally.

The first would be "in the corner" (even if only slightly) and the second would not. What I am trying to understand is if Pendragon's technique is the former and, if so, is there some kind of performance advantage to that type of landing.

I have to disagree on this.

I think lot of the other high performance canopies i have flown like velo or neos do benefit from a rear riser plane out. They simply have longer recovery arcs. IMO the XF2 however has a relatively short recovery arc and therefore no rears needed really. Thats the way I think of it...

[Pendragon 1]

Just because the xfire2 has a shorter recovery arc than a crossbraced doesn't mean that rears aren't useful; rather the opportunity to use them is narrower. Besides, why not learn how to use rears on the plane out before transitioning to a crossbraced canopy?

Anyway, you need a decent enough speed - from at least a 270 degree turn - to make any use of them, and depending on your technique, it is possible have a difference experience to someone else.

--
BASE #1182
Muff #3573
PFI #52; UK WSI #13

[stayhigh 2]

crossfires that i've jumped autoplanes out after 270 turn.
where does your rear riser plane out comes into play???

Bernie Sanders for President 2016

[matt002 0]

lots of the canopies I have flown will do this at lighter wing loadings. I have a spectre that will do the same on my usual 450 degree turn. Rather than try to finish the turn at the precise height that will allow it to 'auto recover' (which is near impossible to so with 100% consistency and usually not the best way to carry max speed), I aim to finish slightly lower, I use then rears then to flatten out the glide. It is the same technique I use on more high performance canopies in competition, some would say slightly in the corner, and they would be right. Even if you do hit the 'auto plane out' you can still use the rears to continue the swoop and transition to toggles after, you just wont carry as much speed this way.

When you finish your turn, you have your maximum airspeed and you are basically slowing down the whole time after that, you cant generate anymore airspeed after this point. If you finish your turn slightly lower than the natural recovery arc, and use the rears to plane out, you basically arrive at ground level sooner, and as a result will have more airspeed than a longer more natural recovery arc from a turn that finished higher.
This is of course a direct compromise of safety for performance, and care must be taken not to finish the turn too low as rears might not be enough to keep you from hitting the ground fast.

[DocPop 1]

Thanks Matt.

That's exactly the answer to the question I was trying to ask.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA