Chaos VS Space

[cloud9 0]

This I think will surprise some, piss some off, and make others wonder if it’s true. So let me start with yes it’s true or at least my perception of the truth. I think there is a bias; that bias is that a crossbraced canopy should only be jumped by swoop gods and the rest of the common folk should just disregard the facts.
So here are a few facts (perceptions) as I see them.
I jump a Space 130 loaded at about a 1.5, I have a lot of jumps on this canopy (at lest to me) over 500 and really like it. I need to replace it so I was looking for a Cobalt 135 basically the same canopy. The Space/Cobalt opens great, fly’s great, feels very solid and has a tremendous amount of flare on bottom end. So what else have I jumped? Ok a Cobalt, Stiletto, Sabre2, Crossfire and Crossfire2, Nitro, Jonathon, Jedi, Hornet, and Heatwave, to name a few. I think the Space up to this point was the best canopy I’ve jumped. I am by no means a professional canopy pilot, nor even a great canopy flyer. I just enjoy my weekend jumps and have fun doing them. I do not swoop nor do I intend to swoop, I do sometimes fly a carving 90 degree turn but most often just fly straight in.
So I saw an ad for a Xaos-21 135 and figured everything I heard about this canopy was good, especially the openings. The canopy was reasonable so I thought what the heck let’s give it a try. The results are as follows. Space 130 loaded at about 1.5 Vs. Xaos-21 135 loaded at about the same. First the Space turns faster and dives harder in a hard toggle turn. The Xaos turns a little slower and doesn’t dive as hard initially, The Space will recover and even flare some on its own, the Chaos doesn’t seem to want to do that, it stays in a steep decent not really a dive but a negative recovery. Bottom end on both canopies is great, but the Xaos has the Space and every other canopy I’ve jumped beat all to hell. I think this is the biggest difference between a crossbraced canopy and a typical 9 cell. Both seem to fly at about the same speed. On flare the distortion of the Xaos is much less than the Space so it stands to reason that there would be a more powerful flare. It also stands to reason that you could load the canopy a lot higher. The openings on both canopies are great, but I must confess the Xaos opens great better than I thought it would. I was surprised at how nice the openings were. So the Xoas all in all proved to be the better canopy for me, openings were great, flare was awesome, the rest was very similar to a Space/Cobalt.
I will finish with this the Xaos vs. Space was very close, I felt like the Space at this wing loading felt a little more aggressive the the Xaos. I feel certain that at higher wing loadings that would change but at a 1.5 the Space seemed more responsive. This Xaos has been flown at a 1.4 wing loading a 1.5 wing loading and a 1.6 wing loading. I don’t know about before I got it. With all of that said I don’t see any reason why someone flying an elliptical canopy at these wing loading should fear flying a Xaos-21 I think for the most part they would be surprised that It doesn’t seem as aggressive as many canopies. The Stiletto turns much faster in my opinion.

The cons of going to a crossbraced over a 9 cell elliptical? Well the crossbraced canopy packs bigger, it also cost more new, you will probably have to change the lines a little more frequent and you will have to put up with all the naysayers telling you, you shouldn’t be on the canopy. Is it ok to fly a Xaos at a 1.4 or 1.5 wing loading? Well according to Precision Aerodynamics it is, I don’t have a problem taking their word for it. Can they be landed straight in with out a speed increasing turn? Most definitely without any problem at all, in fact they still have more flare then any traditional 9 cell I’ve jumped.
The pros of going to a crossbraced canopy, you may find one like I did cheaper than a non-crossbraced of similar performance. You will get more flare power out of the same size canopy, and it will start the flare much quicker with a small toggle bump. So all in all no reason not to go with a Xaos in lieu of a 9 cell elliptical canopy at a moderate wing loading. If you can find one rasonable and don’t mind the larger pack volume. So I know we will hear from some nay sayers however I think if you call Precision Aerodynamics you’ll hear the same thing I’m saying. Ok so in closing I’m not telling anyone to go buy and load up a crossbraced canopy. I’m also not talking about any crossbraced other than the Xaos-21. I/m also talking about if you jump an elliptical at a 1.5 wing loading you won’t find a lot of difference between the two. A 120 sq. ft. canopy fly’s about the same speed at the same wing loading, not matter if it’s a 7 cell, 9 cell or crossbraced.
Honestly I wonder why a lot more people don’t fly them; they have more flare and bottom end then most canopies and are not any more aggressive than most ellipticals in normal flight. So let’s have some discussion on this subject, I’m very curious what others think.
Oh for the profile lookers, mine hasn’t been updated since 2006 you can check with the mods on that if you are so compelled.

[matt002 0]

When I got my first x brace (katana 107 - velocity 96) I remember being distinctly underwhelmed by the initial flights.
I imagined that x braced canopies were something super hardcore, I don't know what I was expecting but it was just a canopy, much like any other. My katana despite being larger, lost more height in turns, had lower riser pressure and seemed to me at the time more high performance, I later came to realise it was just less efficient as a wing and with the correct technique the x braced was so far advanced that I couldn't go back to 'flying' any 9 cell.

I think your observations are quite correct, although most x braced canopies at a lower wing loading will tend to have less reliable openings, from what I hear some of the newer models are better in this respect.

Like you say, the very negative recovery arc is something all x braced canopies will share, this is a necessary characteristic of modern high performance wings, provided the pilot is experienced in flying a canopy that has this property, then of course x braced is an option.

I guess the reason that x braced canopies are held up as being solely for experienced high performance pilots is that most people looking to fly them are basically looking to fly hard and use then for the purposes they are designed for, few people looking for an everyday canopy to land straight in would look for such a wing as there are usually cheaper and more suitable canopies avaliable for that purpose, but like you say, that doesn't mean a x braced canopy can't be used, just it would rarely be the best option to such a jumper.

[DocPop 1]

matt002

I later came to realise it was just less efficient as a wing and with the correct technique the x braced was so far advanced that I couldn't go back to 'flying' any 9 cell.

I am about to make this move. What technique differences did you make to adjust to the Velocity?

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

~ CanuckInUSA

[matt002 0]

I stopped trying drag the canopy to the ground on the front risers as is so easy to do with the katana, and instead use rotation to fly it towards the ground, actively giving up on the fronts in order to engage the harness instead.

[DocPop 1]

Thanks - that's very clear and useful.

Do you use the fronts at all now, or do the whole rotation with harness?

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

~ CanuckInUSA

[matt002 0]

I use them in every rotation, just in big turns I let them completely max out before giving them up and using harness, on smaller turns I will give them up sooner, as I like to finish any turn on harness imput, I find it easier to snap the end of a turn around on harness and that won't work well if your still hanging your weight on the fronts.

[DocPop 1]

Thanks again - that's very helpful. I've heard the Velocity has quite high front riser pressure.

At the moment I'm only up to 270s on my Katana but I'll be going all the way back down to 90s before building back up again so I probably won't be maxing out the fronts for some time, but I'll certainly try flicking the last 90 with harness only up high.

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

~ CanuckInUSA

[ianmdrennan 2]

I use all fronts for 270 and less. For 450 or bigger I start on fronts and transition to harness.

ian

Performance Designs Factory Team

[DocPop 1]

Great to know. Personally, this is becoming one of the more informative threads I've ever read here!

Thanks Ian.

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

~ CanuckInUSA

[DocPop 1]

Having jumped the VE for the first time yesterday (WL 1.9), I can see why the turn technique has to be different from the KA; there is a lot more pressure on the fronts (and the toggles).

I'll probably start my turns from brakes now. Something I didn't bother with on the KA. I'm thinking I should be able to get 800' of dive with a 270 when I get it dialed in.

However, overall, what an amazing canopy. The rears feel so powerful and controllable.

It feels like everything else I have ever flown was a car with a flat tyre - just slightly soggy feeling whereas the VE is so connected.

This is going to be a fun learning curve!

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

~ CanuckInUSA

[matt3sa 0]

Well said.... To someone that is a true canopy pilot that is very involved in the sport (like I am guessing you are), I think you're spot on. I think the overall danger only comes into play when you get a skydiver that rapidly downsizes or does not take adequate time to fully understand what each canopy that they choose to fly can do. 500 jumps on a Space is legit. You know that canopy like the back of your hand. Also, you aren't doing anything that is out of your comfort level. You continue to make the same exact straight in approaches on the Xaos. Therefore, the only major change is the decent rate of Xaos, and the need to tell it to pull out of the dive. I just think that many people in the sport don't take the time to learn one canopy at a time and make a safe/conservative gameplan. For example when I ditched my Cobalt 135 I was swooping the snot out of it. I went to a Velocity 111 and I was like a student again. I didn't even start any type of high performance approaches until I had over 100 jumps on it. Anyway, well said and I think you are correct about the more powerful flair and other beneficial flight characteristics.

[matt3sa 0]

DocPop

Having jumped the VE for the first time yesterday (WL 1.9), I can see why the turn technique has to be different from the KA; there is a lot more pressure on the fronts (and the toggles).

I'll probably start my turns from brakes now. Something I didn't bother with on the KA. I'm thinking I should be able to get 800' of dive with a 270 when I get it dialed in.

However, overall, what an amazing canopy. The rears feel so powerful and controllable.

It feels like everything else I have ever flown was a car with a flat tyre - just slightly soggy feeling whereas the VE is so connected.

This is going to be a fun learning curve!

DocPop,

I skipped the Katana but want to try one out pretty badly just because I'm curious. I new guy at our DZ is going to let me try out his Katana. I think it's a 120... which would be a pretty light w/l for me. I'm on my Velo 96 at about 1.9 as well. How would you compare the Katana to the Velo?

[matt3sa 0]

Cloud9.....

Check out this recent incident http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4175431;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;forum_view=forum_view_collapsed;;page=unread#unread

It's an example of why I say you are correct about the flight characteristics, but yet why the general consensus doesn't support people flying smaller/harder diving canopies.

[DocPop 1]

I went from a KA120 to a VE103. My very initial impression (based on only one high-pull on the VE) is that the Katana does everything the Velocity does, but the VE does it all better. I don't feel like the VE dives all that much more.

It is a cleaner, more rigid wing and the rears feel amazing. The front riser pressure is going to take some getting used to after the KA's super-light fronts.

I think you will probably be disappointed by the KA after flying a Velo, particularly if you're going from a 96 to a 120.

I am really looking forward to exploring this canopy more - particularly how much I can do with harness input.

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

~ CanuckInUSA

[DocPop 1]

I meant to add that the KA120 to VE103 was what PD recommend as the right progression, so I think for a comparison of your 96 you might want to be trying the KA107.

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

~ CanuckInUSA

[cloud9 0]

I agree completely a small canopy can get you in trouble quick, I guess what I'm saying is if you jump an elliptical canopy at a 1.5 wing loading and you have the experience to be on that canopy then a Xaos-21 of the same size would probably surprise you. It would fly very similar, would have more bottom end, feel more solid and I think;... again I think;... would be an acceptable choice. So I wouldn’t ignore it based solely on the cross bracing.

[stayhigh 2]

Any x-braced bigger than 120 must feel like tandem canopy??

Haven't flown anything bigger than 99 but 99 felt too big at 2.1 wingloading.

and not that many people will call Xaos has negative recovery arc.....
i think they fly flat as they can be.

Bernie Sanders for President 2016

[cloud9 0]

Don't know never jumped a tandem

[Bufobufo 0]

I know some canopy manufacturers describe their canopies as "flying with a negative recovery arc", like the samurai.

But.. Wouldn't a wing with a negative recovery arc tend to dive more and more even in normal flight without inputs, eventually putting you in a vertical dive or eventually dive in between you and the ground?

For me a canopy can have a short or long recovery arc, but never negative?

[davelepka 4]

Quote

the Katana does everything the Velocity does, but the VE does it all better. I don't feel like the VE dives all that much more.

It is a cleaner, more rigid wing and the rears feel amazing

You're missing the point. The X-braced canopy is more rigid and flatter across the surface of the canopy, letting you use more of the square footage for 'flying'.

A conventional canopy has those little 'valleys' in between each cell, and there's very little lift being created down there. So out of 120 sq ft, you're not actually flying all 120 sq ft, just the 'high spots' that get the clean air flow (although those 'spots' represent a good portion of the sq footage).

The x-bracing lets the canopy's surface be flatter, with no valleys, so you get clean airflow across more of the surface. The end result is that you can fly a smaller sized canopy and still produce the same amount of lift. So you can expect a similar bottom end (stall) speed as a larger, conventional canopy, but you can also expect a higher top speed based on the loading.

This is why people say you 'need' to load an x braced canopy at 2.2 or better (or whatever). We know you don't 'need' to in order for the canopy to function, but for it to really stand out much more than a conventional wing, you do need to push into the WL where a convention wing would start to suffer (which has always been about 1.9/2.0).

Of course, none of this has anything to do with downsizing progression. You still need to make smart, gradual moves, regardless of what people thing you 'need' to be doing. Even flying a Velo at less than 2.2 is a very HP wing, and there is lot's to learn. You will get to know the characteristics of the wing, and if you downsize again to a smaller Velo, you'll notice it's just 'more' of everything you learned on the 'big' Velo.

[DocPop 1]

davelepka

A conventional canopy has those little 'valleys' in between each cell, and there's very little lift being created down there. So out of 120 sq ft, you're not actually flying all 120 sq ft, just the 'high spots' that get the clean air flow (although those 'spots' represent a good portion of the sq footage).

The x-bracing lets the canopy's surface be flatter, with no valleys, so you get clean airflow across more of the surface. The end result is that you can fly a smaller sized canopy and still produce the same amount of lift. So you can expect a similar bottom end (stall) speed as a larger, conventional canopy, but you can also expect a higher top speed based on the loading.

That's a great explanation. I hadn't thought about it in those terms.

I do know that I over-controlled on the toggles yesterday when I transitioned off the rears. I gave it what would have been right for the Katana and popped up.

This thing just keeps on flying and I need to re-calibrate my brain!

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

~ CanuckInUSA

[cloud9 0]

I think where this come in at least to me is; if you make a hard turn and dive with say a stiletto it will dive hard then recover and actually flare a bit. It will then surge and dive again. I know my Space will do the same thing it just takes longer. I find that the Xaos might go back to original flight but I haven't found that it will flare itself of course maybe I haven't had it in a dive long enough.

[cloud9 0]

Very interesting this is what I've found so that at a lower wing loading the same size canopy the cross braced canopy (I know people hate this description) but it feels bigger. Although it does fly just as fast and does dives longer. It doesn't seem to turn as quick or dive as hard at first it just seems to stay there longer. Like I said at the same wing loading around a 1.5 the Space feels more aggressive. At least to me anyway.

[SkymonkeyONE 4]

ianmdrennan

I use all fronts for 270 and less. For 450 or bigger I start on fronts and transition to harness.

ian

Likewise, particularly under my Velo 90 work canopies. Too slow to initiate a good rate of rotation without the fronts on the 270's that I do 90% of the time and the riser pressure becomes too much to maintain on turns greater than 270 degrees so I continue the rotation with harness.

Chuck