Wingloading for profit, not fun.

[Polorutz 0]

Hi guys.

I'm an inexperienced skydiver getting to grips with Canopy Flying and all that entails.

My question is this:

If I do not want to swoop or hook turn close to the ground, what is a good wingloading to have in order to have good control authority in the flare and stability in winds?

Basically, I do not want to swoop or hook turn, I want to be able to fly well in full flight and give myself a good forward speed to be able to fly in windier days.

I am currently flying a pulse 190 and plan on staying on that size for the time being, I weigh 165 lbs and adding 25 lbs for gear I'm roughly loaded at 1.0. When the wind picks up to 15 knots or so it starts becoming a bit of a pain to get forward speed.

I don't think I want to go too small but I do want to be able to jump in windier days so long as it's not too gusty.

Any ideas?

[FB1609 0]

I would recommend a 170ish, Sabre 2 or similar.. very friendly canopy that will give you enough performance to keep you happy and safe.

You have a great attitude IMO, don't let the ego take over.

[Joellercoaster 6]

I think if all you want is penetration into strong-but-reasonable winds, there is probably no reason to go above 1.3 for your whole jumping career.

As a person with a much higher WL than that, I still sit down in high winds. If I wouldn't jump a 170 on a given day, then a 120 won't really make it safer.

(NOTE that this is not a recommendation that you go out and get a canopy loaded at 1.3, just a statement that I can't imagine higher loading than that being justified by wind penetration.)

--
"I'll tell you how all skydivers are judged, . They are judged by the laws of physics." - kkeenan

"You jump out, pull the string and either live or die. What's there to be good at?

[Polorutz 0]

Thanks for your reply Joellercoaster, that's round about what I was thinking.

What is the difference then regarding wind penetration when you fly at 1.3 WL compared to a higher loading?

[chuckakers 369]

Joellercoaster

I think if all you want is penetration into strong-but-reasonable winds, there is probably no reason to go above 1.3 for your whole jumping career.

As a person with a much higher WL than that, I still sit down in high winds. If I wouldn't jump a 170 on a given day, then a 120 won't really make it safer.

(NOTE that this is not a recommendation that you go out and get a canopy loaded at 1.3:1, just a statement that I can't imagine higher loading than that being justified by wind penetration.)

I concur. 1.3 is about as loaded as one needs to penetrate into any wind that is safe for jumping. Also keep in mind that any wind greater than 20'ish greatly increases the chance for turbulence even if the wind itself is smooth. A 20+ mph wind interacting with buildings, trees, and even changes in elevation can create nasty bumps. Hit one of those bumps when it's time to flare and the game becomes one of chance.

Until up-sizing recently I was flying a Velo at 2:1 and still always parked my butt when the winds would go north of 20 or 21, and less than that if they were chunky.

Staying conservative in canopy choices will serve you well. Staying conservative in minute-by-minute decisions will serve you even better.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[Pablo.Moreno 0]

Just remember that just because you are flying a conservative canopy and not doing any hook turns on landing doesn't mean you are not going to them at some point in your career (someone in front of you or to avoid an obstacle).

You can do a bunch of drills on your current canopy on how to dig out of turns and how to turn violently with a minimum amount of altitude lost up high.

The ground doesn't care what wingloading or what canopy you are flying, if you are going fast enough you are going to get hurt.

[Polorutz 0]

Pablo, I regularly do spirals and digging out of turns without releasing the in-the-turn toggle as practice for the situation you're describing.

I also do front-riser turns and I thoroughly explore my canopy's handling characteristics and will continue to do so.

I do this well above 2500' and clear of traffic, after that it's the be predictable game for me.

[chuckakers 369]

Pablo.Moreno

Just remember that just because you are flying a conservative canopy and not doing any hook turns on landing doesn't mean you are not going to them at some point in your career (someone in front of you or to avoid an obstacle).

You can do a bunch of drills on your current canopy on how to dig out of turns and how to turn violently with a minimum amount of altitude lost up high.

The ground doesn't care what wingloading or what canopy you are flying, if you are going fast enough you are going to get hurt.

Funny, we survived quite nicely for decades without anyone ever touching a riser - front or rear, and I can't think of a single situation I've ever been in that required the use of front risers because someone was in front of me or any other scenario.

I'm not implying that there's anything wrong with exploring/learning/mastering all that a canopy is capable of, but the use of risers is not a necessary component of safe flight.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[FrancoR 0]

I have been jumping a spectre 170 for about 1000 jumps and thats also how old it was. Now i am on a Pilot 168 and i feel and i am slower than with the old maybe worn out spectre. My GPS tells me i have about 10km/h less on my Pilot.

Quote

If it does not cost anything you are the product.

• Quote

[Pablo.Moreno 0]

chuckakers

***Just remember that just because you are flying a conservative canopy and not doing any hook turns on landing doesn't mean you are not going to them at some point in your career (someone in front of you or to avoid an obstacle).

You can do a bunch of drills on your current canopy on how to dig out of turns and how to turn violently with a minimum amount of altitude lost up high.

The ground doesn't care what wingloading or what canopy you are flying, if you are going fast enough you are going to get hurt.

Funny, we survived quite nicely for decades without anyone ever touching a riser - front or rear, and I can't think of a single situation I've ever been in that required the use of front risers because someone was in front of me or any other scenario.

I'm not implying that there's anything wrong with exploring/learning/mastering all that a canopy is capable of, but the use of risers is not a necessary component of safe flight.

Sorry I guess I shouldn't have said hook turn, but low turns.
I am glad you haven't have to experience that, I haven't either (profile is off by a little), but I know many people that have been jumping since the 70s and don't use any risers and one of them four years ago lost a leg because of a low turn scenario.

I am sure people still injured them self landing back in the days, just in a lower proportion than now days.

[craddock 0]

chuckakers

Funny, we survived quite nicely for decades without anyone ever touching a riser - front or rear, and I can't think of a single situation I've ever been in that required the use of front risers because someone was in front of me or any other scenario.

I'm not implying that there's anything wrong with exploring/learning/mastering all that a canopy is capable of, but the use of risers is not a necessary component of safe flight.

I didn't take anything about front riser input out of what he said. Just that proper low turns save lives. When I met my wife I saw her canopy skills were horrid even though she didn't think so nor anyone else. She just never turned below a certain altitude. Then we landed off together and I swooped across someones yard driveway on the close side of the field to that airport as I watched her fly straight to the other side of the field as I felt like I was watching my 8 iron approach shot after coming cleaner than expected out of the rough. "GET DOWN!" "GET Down!"

And it/she did but she finally understood why I WANTED her to practice low turns. I think that is what he meant

That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

[jty2007 0]

chuckakers

***Just remember that just because you are flying a conservative canopy and not doing any hook turns on landing doesn't mean you are not going to them at some point in your career (someone in front of you or to avoid an obstacle).

You can do a bunch of drills on your current canopy on how to dig out of turns and how to turn violently with a minimum amount of altitude lost up high.

The ground doesn't care what wingloading or what canopy you are flying, if you are going fast enough you are going to get hurt.

Funny, we survived quite nicely for decades without anyone ever touching a riser - front or rear, and I can't think of a single situation I've ever been in that required the use of front risers because someone was in front of me or any other scenario.

I'm not implying that there's anything wrong with exploring/learning/mastering all that a canopy is capable of, but the use of risers is not a necessary component of safe flight.

Disagree. Or rather, I would say pilots who spend the time and energy to learn their available control inputs (including fronts, rears, harness) are safer pilots. I think people get hurt year after year because they only know how to turn or fly or land one way. Having to land out, downwind of the target area greatly increases the chances of winding up hurt when you didn't think touching risers would make a safer pilot.

The sport and everyone in it is much better off because a few people spent the time and effort to learn what risers do and how to use them.

[skow 6]

chuckakers

Funny, we survived quite nicely for decades without anyone ever touching a riser - front or rear, and I can't think of a single situation I've ever been in that required the use of front risers because someone was in front of me or any other scenario.

So people started dying/ getting hurt under canopy only after starting to use fronts/rears?
In my opinion hook turns/swoops are indeed dangerous, but there have been/will be situations in which using risers would have or will prevent people from getting hurt.

[chuckakers 369]

jty2007

******Just remember that just because you are flying a conservative canopy and not doing any hook turns on landing doesn't mean you are not going to them at some point in your career (someone in front of you or to avoid an obstacle).

You can do a bunch of drills on your current canopy on how to dig out of turns and how to turn violently with a minimum amount of altitude lost up high.

The ground doesn't care what wingloading or what canopy you are flying, if you are going fast enough you are going to get hurt.

Funny, we survived quite nicely for decades without anyone ever touching a riser - front or rear, and I can't think of a single situation I've ever been in that required the use of front risers because someone was in front of me or any other scenario.

I'm not implying that there's anything wrong with exploring/learning/mastering all that a canopy is capable of, but the use of risers is not a necessary component of safe flight.

Disagree. Or rather, I would say pilots who spend the time and energy to learn their available control inputs (including fronts, rears, harness) are safer pilots. I think people get hurt year after year because they only know how to turn or fly or land one way. Having to land out, downwind of the target area greatly increases the chances of winding up hurt when you didn't think touching risers would make a safer pilot.

Quote

I'd like to hear that statement put together in a way that actually describes something. Please describe for me how people "get hurt year after year" by not using risers, and while you're at it tell me how a jumper has an increased chance of "winding up hurt when you didn't think touching risers would make a safer pilot" whatever that means.

Specifically, talk me through a real-world scenario in which a jumper has been injured because they DIDN'T use risers in any particular situation.

Take a look around. The vast majority of jumpers NEVER touch their risers, yet they aren't bouncing off the ground in any greater numbers (and maybe in fewer numbers) than anyone else.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[chuckakers 369]

skow

***
Funny, we survived quite nicely for decades without anyone ever touching a riser - front or rear, and I can't think of a single situation I've ever been in that required the use of front risers because someone was in front of me or any other scenario.

So people started dying/ getting hurt under canopy only after starting to use fronts/rears?

Quote

No. I never said nor implied that. My point was/is that there is no need to use risers to stay safe - as proven every weekend on DZ's around the world.

...there have been/will be situations in which using risers would have or will prevent people from getting hurt.

Quote

Describe one.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[skow 6]

chuckakers

***

***
Funny, we survived quite nicely for decades without anyone ever touching a riser - front or rear, and I can't think of a single situation I've ever been in that required the use of front risers because someone was in front of me or any other scenario.

So people started dying/ getting hurt under canopy only after starting to use fronts/rears?


No. I never said nor implied that. My point was/is that there is no need to use risers to stay safe - as proven every weekend on DZ's around the world.


Yes, I know. That was a bit of a joke. And a bit of a serious statement that sometimes use of risers can prevent accidents.

chuckakers

***

...there have been/will be situations in which using risers would have or will prevent people from getting hurt.

Describe one.

The very first one that comes to my mind is avoiding collision after opening, being very close to another jumper and not having the time to grab a toggle.

Second one, when you use the (back) risers while flaring, you save more power for your toggles, so as a result you can brake more / loose more speed when landing e.g sidewind or in no wind conditions

Thirdly, in case of a strong head wind (i.e. when wind speed is greater that canopy's speed) you can use front risers to gain more speed and e.g. pass over an obstacle (building, trees etc.)

[chuckakers 369]

skow

***

***

***
Funny, we survived quite nicely for decades without anyone ever touching a riser - front or rear, and I can't think of a single situation I've ever been in that required the use of front risers because someone was in front of me or any other scenario.

So people started dying/ getting hurt under canopy only after starting to use fronts/rears?


No. I never said nor implied that. My point was/is that there is no need to use risers to stay safe - as proven every weekend on DZ's around the world.


Yes, I know. That was a bit of a joke. And a bit of a serious statement that sometimes use of risers can prevent accidents.

chuckakers

***

...there have been/will be situations in which using risers would have or will prevent people from getting hurt.

Describe one.

The very first one that comes to my mind is avoiding collision after opening, being very close to another jumper and not having the time to grab a toggle.

Quote

Using risers to avoid a collision on opening is not the same a using risers during routine flight. A riser turn during deployment isn't used because it's somehow superior to a toggle turn. It's used simply because it's faster than trying to find and release toggles when they are still stowed. Once the toggles are unstowed they provide the most immediate way to avoid a collision.

Second one, when you use the (back) risers while flaring, you save more power for your toggles, so as a result you can brake more / loose more speed when landing e.g sidewind or in no wind conditions

Quote

That's a ridiculous statement. Maximum lift (or power, as you called it) is achieved by starting with maximum speed. Using risers first during a flare does not result in toggles being more efficient, nor will it give a jumper more stopping power than using toggles alone. Rear risers are used by swoopers because it generates enough lift to plane out the flight path without creating as much swoop-stealing drag as toggles do.

Thirdly, in case of a strong head wind (i.e. when wind speed is greater that canopy's speed) you can use front risers to gain more speed and e.g. pass over an obstacle (building, trees etc.)

Quote

While technically true, using fronts in winds as strong as you describe is dicey because of turbulence associated with high winds near obstacles.

My point was/is that the VAST MAJORITY of skydivers do not use risers in routine flight and it bugs me that there is a new crop of jumpers in the sport that think that makes them dangerous. It does not.

I'm not against learning to use risers, and I'm not against using them for routine flight. What I am against are jumpers who call out those who don't use them as somehow unsafe.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[skow 6]

chuckakers

Using risers to avoid a collision on opening is not the same a using risers during routine flight. A riser turn during deployment isn't used because it's somehow superior to a toggle turn. It's used simply because it's faster than trying to find and release toggles when they are still stowed. Once the toggles are unstowed they provide the most immediate way to avoid a collision.

[craddock 0]

Chuck,
Don't take this personal or as an attack but you may want to review the format of your posts. When you read them you of course know what you have actually wrote. If someone comes into a thread and reads one of your posts it is very hard to determine who is saying what. I have to go back to see what the previous posts say.

The easiest way is to write outside of the colored dialog box. It is a pain to cut and past howerver when you are breaking points up I understand and because of this I do not do that. I wish it was easier and I understand why you use the "in reply to" Now that I have it kind of figured out what you are doing it is not quite so bad and maybe you have thought this through already. In that case disregard. But if you have not I would just like to point it out. Again I realize the way others do it is a complete PITA if you are going to go point by point like that. Unless someone else has some tips for both of us.

Hopefully this does not come across negative as it is not intended such. Have a good day

That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.

[jty2007 0]

Few weeks ago, a jumper gets excess steering line worked into a half hitch as he unstows brakes. Still tries to flare with toggles which turned him square into the ground in the direction of the free steering line. He wasn't hurt badly but the danger is obvious.

You could say "well just cut away if you can't land on rears" but it is perfectly possible to land a canopy on rears safely. I'd go further and say that that canopy shouldn't be cut away. It's there, square, and safely steerable/landable (with risers).

[jty2007 0]

Using variety of control inputs to get out of a jam (hopefully) isn't routine and I will give you that. I also don't think that people who don't touch risers or lean in the harness for 95% of their canopy flight are inhrently and necessarily unsafe. But less safe? Yes. I meant to say that those extra piloting tools exist to help in certain, less routine (but equally real) circumstances.

[980 0]

Quote

A riser turn during deployment isn't used because it's somehow superior to a toggle turn.

I have to disagree with you here. A riser turn with the brakes still stowed is a far superior turn for collision avoidance if you have altitude to burn (which you do because you are skydiving).

The reason for this is that it responds immediately and depending on canopy, WL, how much input and whether you stall the turning half of your canopy or not, you either:

-turn with very little forward movement (but more altitude loss)

-pivot in place (no forward movement but more altitude loss)

-back up slightly while turning (with high altitude loss)

Any one of these being better than moving forward as much as you would during a toggle turn while you are trying to avoid something in front of you.

Plus your whole avoidance can be done this way before you can pop your toggles.


These things may not be very obvious from skydiving, but spend some time opening close to things and the ground like BASE jumpers do and you can't help but notice their effect.


To further respond to your question regarding the use of risers in skydiving:

Using your risers to turn your parahute off the jumprun and towards a good direction for making a safe landing before pulling your slider down etc is certainly a valid and good use of risers.

Most likely you just do that on harness input given a Velo at 2.0 but consider someone on a rectangular canopy at 1.3 and risers make sense.

Someone else mentioned landing on the rears with a brake-line hangup which is valid too.

There is also the rare case of dropping a toggle when transitioning from rears to toggles and being able to salvage a safe landing out of it by completing the flare with the rear riser/s.


I wanted to say something to the lines of front riser dive to rear riser plane out swoops are far more forgiving than toggle-hook swoops, but I can see that being a poke at a hornet's (not PISA Hornet mind you) nest due to the increase in swoop related injuries/deaths we've seen. One can argue that part of that is just due to increasing numbers of jumpers, smaller parachutes and higher WL's in general, likely risk homeostasis, etc. but it becomes hard to justify swooping given the image that these incidents have portrayed.

[chuckakers 369]

This conversation took a turn.

I agree that the use of risers for specific purposes is fine, effective, whatever.

My original point was about front risers...

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4611881#4611881

I guess I was being too general in my comments as the thread progressed, so...

Yes using risers to avoid is valid. Yes using risers to turn back the DZ is valid. Yes there are other valid uses for risers. My point was more about people who insist that jumpers need to learn and use all the various control techniques - particularly front risers - to be competent, safe jumpers and I disagree with that mindset.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, the VAST MAJORITY of jumpers never use front risers in routine canopy flight, yet we don't see them bouncing off the turf any more (and possibly less) than jumpers who do.

Sometimes new generations of jumpers begin to believe that people who aren't using the very latest techniques and gear are dangerous or lacking in some way. That bothers me. I love to see the looks on those people's faces when my old fart buddies show up at the DZ with open-riser rigs, fabric hats, and no altimeters.

And then when they see them flat pack - oh boy!

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[DocPop 1]

chuckakers

My point was more about people who insist that jumpers need to learn and use all the various control techniques - particularly front risers - to be competent, safe jumpers and I disagree with that mindset.

Do you disagree with flying a canopy in all flight modes before downsizing?

The commonly heard advice is to get to know everything about your wing before downsizing - would you say that does not include becoming comfortable with front riser use?

[This is a genuine question - not a trap or a disagreement with your statement]

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

~ CanuckInUSA

[chuckakers 369]

DocPop

*** My point was more about people who insist that jumpers need to learn and use all the various control techniques - particularly front risers - to be competent, safe jumpers and I disagree with that mindset.

Do you disagree with flying a canopy in all flight modes before downsizing?

The commonly heard advice is to get to know everything about your wing before downsizing - would you say that does not include becoming comfortable with front riser use?

[This is a genuine question - not a trap or a disagreement with your statement]

I believe a jumper should be fully competent with his/her canopy relative to flying style before downsizing. That means different things to different people.

If a jumper uses techniques like front riser input, it obviously makes sense to master that skill with more nylon overhead before trying it with less nylon overhead.

However, if front riser input (or any other maneuver) is not in the jumper's bag, it makes no sense to perform them for the sake of following some arbitrary advice and might even prove dangerous.

Many jumpers simply have no need or desire to use every control technique available to them. Look around at the DZ. How many people are manipulating canopies with anything more than left toggle, right toggle, brake, and flare? Not too many at most DZ's.

The use of techniques beyond simple glide and steer are an individual choice. I have always been a big proponent of letting the swoop cowboys do their thing. Hell I was one of them for 15 years. However I feel the same way about people on the other end. If a skydiver doesn't care to use performance techniques, they shouldn't be considered a second class canopy pilot because of that choice.

Back to your question - I do believe there is a point in wing loading and canopy choice where a jumper does need a complete understanding of all input and outcome possibilities. However, people who progress to that performance level typically want to learn those skills. If they don't they fall into the "hotdog" category and are probably already flying outside their skill set. We all know those guys.

That's not the jumper I'm talking about. I'm talking about the recreational weekend jumper who wants a little more performance but is still in the middle of the performance envelope. I see no need to wring out a 170 at 1 to 1 doing things a jumper has never done before and will never do again in preparation of not doing those things on a 150.

I agree with mastery of flying style before downsizing up to but not beyond the point where high performance technique is necessary to remain safe.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX