0
CloudyHead

Two canopy out.. to release or not release?

Recommended Posts

out of curiousity, i UTFSE to search for two canopy out situations, and read that most people recommend releasing the toggles of one of the canopies.

I've been studying my CSPA manual all weekend (wow, no life!), and it says "DO NOT release the brakes" for a side-by-side and bi-plane configuration. Fly using rear risers..

It also says that if you are in a bi-plane configuration, you should steer the rear canopy into a side-by-side.. but on these forums i have heard someone say that the bi-plane is actually better than a side-by-side because it is less likely to result in a down-plane.

there seems to be a lot of debate on this, but what's the reasoning behind both sides??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From the USPA SIM:

2. Both parachutes deployed:

a. Biplane
(1) Do not cut away.
(2) Steer the front canopy gently using toggles or leave the brakes stowed and steer by pulling on the rear risers.
(3) Leave the brakes stowed on the back canopy.
(4) Make a parachute landing fall on landing.

b. Side-by-side (two alternatives)
--- side-by-side alternative one:
If the two canopies are not tangled, cut away and fly the reserve to a safe landing.
--- side-by-side alternative two
(1) Steer the dominant (larger) canopy gently using toggles or leave the brakes stowed and steer by pulling on the rear risers.
(2) Leave the brakes stowed on the other canopy.
(3) Make a parachute landing fall on landing.

c. Downplane: Cut away the main canopy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i see the reasoning behind matching the brakes to stay straight, but why would the first set be released in the first place? if you keep them all stowed, they will all match, then you can focus on input through the rear risers. is this right?

i could also see the advantage of keeping them all stowed so that you aren't travelling in full flight. Since you aren't supposed to flare anyways on landing, you might as well fly in half brakes all the way down? no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

i see the reasoning behind matching the brakes to stay straight,



If the canopies are already flying in a stable configuration, it doesn't make sense to me to make any changes, particularly with a bi-plane.

Quote

but why would the first set be released in the first place?



The reserve can accidentally (aggressive maneuvering causes an AAD to activate) or intentionally(problem with the main below 1000') deploy after the brakes have been released on the main.

ETA:

Quote


CSPA...

Side-by-side

"If you have already released a brake set, fly that canopy at 1/2 brakes in order to help match the speed so both canopies will stay together."



This makes much more sense to me than releasing the brakes on the other canopy This option provides the ability to give gentle matching input with the toggles rather than adding in the sudden surge caused by releasing the other toggles so that they match.
Owned by Remi #?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It also says that if you are in a bi-plane configuration, you should steer the rear canopy into a side-by-side.. but on these forums i have heard someone say that the bi-plane is actually better than a side-by-side because it is less likely to result in a down-plane.



That seems crazy. A bi-plane is very stable, a side by side much less so. Can't imagine there being any debate about the preference, but sure would like to hear the reasoning why you'd want to change a bi-plane to side-by.
People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote




It also says that if you are in a bi-plane configuration, you should steer the rear canopy into a side-by-side..



Where does it say this?





Page 135 - 136 (PIM 2A)


Bi-plane configuration

This occurs when one canopy is flying directly in front of the other, also known as a "stack". The nose of the rear canopy will tend to "lock" into the front canopy lines. NEVER cut away the main canopy when it is in front.

First, ensure that there are no entanglements. Take the time to LOOK! Trace all 8 risers to see they are clear, up to the sliders, and visually follow the lines up to each canopy. The risers could be entangled; you must look up and follow each riser to make sure they are all clear of one another.

DO NOT release the brakes.

If the canopies or risers are entangled (this can happen if the reserve fires through the main canopy through deployment), or you are at less than 1000', or you are unsure, then steer the FRONT canopy, very gently, using the Rear Risers. Canopies of similar size will fly compatibly. Try to prevent a down-plane.

If the canopies are not entangled, you can use the rear risers on the REAR canopy and steer into a side-by-side configuration. Then follow the information above for a side-by-side.

When landing, DO NOT flare, and be ready to perform a PLF. The descent rate of two canopies out is slower than if you are under a single canopy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

It also says that if you are in a bi-plane configuration, you should steer the rear canopy into a side-by-side.. but on these forums i have heard someone say that the bi-plane is actually better than a side-by-side because it is less likely to result in a down-plane.



That seems crazy. A bi-plane is very stable, a side by side much less so. Can't imagine there being any debate about the preference, but sure would like to hear the reasoning why you'd want to change a bi-plane to side-by.





Could changing into a side-by-side have anything to do with obtaining the new option to cutaway (as long as there are no entanglements)? This comes back to USPA vs CSPA though (CSPA says not to cutaway in a side-by-side, USPA says go ahead).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

It also says that if you are in a bi-plane configuration, you should steer the rear canopy into a side-by-side.. but on these forums i have heard someone say that the bi-plane is actually better than a side-by-side because it is less likely to result in a down-plane.



That seems crazy. A bi-plane is very stable, a side by side much less so. Can't imagine there being any debate about the preference, but sure would like to hear the reasoning why you'd want to change a bi-plane to side-by.





Could changing into a side-by-side have anything to do with obtaining the new option to cutaway (as long as there are no entanglements)? This comes back to USPA vs CSPA though (CSPA says not to cutaway in a side-by-side, USPA says go ahead).



I suppose that might be some rational, but, it is still very difficult, or at least time consuming to confirm that the canopies are actually clear of each other so they can cut-away cleanly. That time is likely to not be in great supply in such a situation. A Bi-plane is extremely stable, no way would I want to change from that configuration in order to facilitate cutting away. I noticed that the CSPA wording says that a jumper "can" change it to a side-by, very different than advising a jumper to do it.

Also, before anyone releases a main in such a situation, it would be good to release an RSL if attached. I know the intended function of the RSL has already been accomplished, but the shackle itself can be a snag hazard, wouldn't want it to grab fabric or lines on the way past.
People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Asking an experienced Canadian jumper...AND any knowledgeable U.S. experienced jumpers:

How can it be that Canada and the U.S. are so totally at odds about how to handle two-out situations.

I'm not suggesting that either one is correct or best practices....just wondering how it came to be that the recommendations are so diametrically opposed.

Somewhere, somehow, somebody had to have pulled something out of their ass. There have been test jumps for this. I can't believe that these recommendations, from either entity, were dreamed up without having been tested.

All the tests I have seen all demonstrated the U.S. recommendations. Canada?
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems that the US SIM is written more as a step by step set of instructions, and updated nearly yearly. While the CSPA has had some good programs, certain manual didn't get updated for years. The PIM 2a that was referenced with the 2-out info is now quite recent, but it hasn't gone through as many fine-tuning revision cycles, and is more of a "read this useful info" text than a set of rules.

While I don't know to what degree US DZ's actually "teach out of the SIM", in Canada we don't necessarily teach straight out of the PIMs , so each DZ will have its own variation.

To mix up the US & Canada stuff more, CSPA PIM 2a section on "two canopy situations" has a footnote right at the start, saying:

Quote

Two-out Canopy and Canopy Collision Information from the research, studies, observations and experiences from US Army study by the Golden Nights, Rusty Vest, and presentation seminars by Jim Cowan of Complete Parachute Solutions, presented at the Parachute Industry Association Symposium, Reno Nevada, 2009.




In any case, whatever is in which manual, I would be interested in opinions on whether cutting away in the case of a side by side is a favoured option or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am backing sundevil on this one.

I have only been stupid enough to find myself with two canopies (Manta 288 and a Tempo 250) out once. but I found that the less i messed with them, the smoother they flew.

If the two canopies are already "playing well together," THE LESS YOU MESS WITH THEM THE BETTER.

IOW
If it looks weird, but is descending slowly - towards an open field - I would not touch the controls.

Rob Warner
USPA Instructor for S/L and IAD
CSPA Instructor for AID, S/L and PFF
Strong Tandem Examiner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote




It also says that if you are in a bi-plane configuration, you should steer the rear canopy into a side-by-side..



Where does it say this?





Page 135 - 136 (PIM 2A)


Bi-plane configuration

This occurs when one canopy is flying directly in front of the other, also known as a "stack". The nose of the rear canopy will tend to "lock" into the front canopy lines. NEVER cut away the main canopy when it is in front.

First, ensure that there are no entanglements. Take the time to LOOK! Trace all 8 risers to see they are clear, up to the sliders, and visually follow the lines up to each canopy. The risers could be entangled; you must look up and follow each riser to make sure they are all clear of one another.

DO NOT release the brakes.

If the canopies or risers are entangled (this can happen if the reserve fires through the main canopy through deployment), or you are at less than 1000', or you are unsure, then steer the FRONT canopy, very gently, using the Rear Risers. Canopies of similar size will fly compatibly. Try to prevent a down-plane.

If the canopies are not entangled, you can use the rear risers on the REAR canopy and steer into a side-by-side configuration. Then follow the information above for a side-by-side.

When landing, DO NOT flare, and be ready to perform a PLF. The descent rate of two canopies out is slower than if you are under a single canopy.



you have confused you can (an option) with you should

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>If the canopies are already flying in a stable configuration, it doesn't make sense to me
>to make any changes, particularly with a bi-plane.

Agreed. If the canopies in their current configuration will land you safely - leave them alone as much as possible, using only those (minimal) inputs you need to point yourself at a relatively safe landing area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote




It also says that if you are in a bi-plane configuration, you should steer the rear canopy into a side-by-side..



Where does it say this?





Page 135 - 136 (PIM 2A)


Bi-plane configuration

This occurs when one canopy is flying directly in front of the other, also known as a "stack". The nose of the rear canopy will tend to "lock" into the front canopy lines. NEVER cut away the main canopy when it is in front.

First, ensure that there are no entanglements. Take the time to LOOK! Trace all 8 risers to see they are clear, up to the sliders, and visually follow the lines up to each canopy. The risers could be entangled; you must look up and follow each riser to make sure they are all clear of one another.

DO NOT release the brakes.

If the canopies or risers are entangled (this can happen if the reserve fires through the main canopy through deployment), or you are at less than 1000', or you are unsure, then steer the FRONT canopy, very gently, using the Rear Risers. Canopies of similar size will fly compatibly. Try to prevent a down-plane.

If the canopies are not entangled, you can use the rear risers on the REAR canopy and steer into a side-by-side configuration. Then follow the information above for a side-by-side.

When landing, DO NOT flare, and be ready to perform a PLF. The descent rate of two canopies out is slower than if you are under a single canopy.



you have confused you can (an option) with you should



but why would they recommend it as an option if it's something you shouldn't do? You CAN also decide to undo your chest straps and legs straps and fall to your death -- why didn't they put that in there too. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Canada

Page 135 - 136 (PIM 2A)


Bi-plane configuration

This occurs when one canopy is flying directly in front of the other, also known as a "stack". The nose of the rear canopy will tend to "lock" into the front canopy lines. NEVER cut away the main canopy when it is in front.

First, ensure that there are no entanglements. Take the time to LOOK! Trace all 8 risers to see they are clear, up to the sliders, and visually follow the lines up to each canopy. The risers could be entangled; you must look up and follow each riser to make sure they are all clear of one another.

DO NOT release the brakes.

If the canopies or risers are entangled (this can happen if the reserve fires through the main canopy through deployment), or you are at less than 1000', or you are unsure, then steer the FRONT canopy, very gently, using the Rear Risers. Canopies of similar size will fly compatibly. Try to prevent a down-plane.

If the canopies are not entangled, you can use the rear risers on the REAR canopy and steer into a side-by-side configuration. Then follow the information above for a side-by-side.

When landing, DO NOT flare, and be ready to perform a PLF. The descent rate of two canopies out is slower than if you are under a single canopy.


----------------------------------------------------
USPA SIM 5-1

Two canopies out
Note: The following recommendations are drawn from experience with larger canopies during tests conducted in the mid-1990s. Smaller canopies may react differently and require a different response.

1. Various scenarios can result in having both parachutes deploy with one of the following outcomes.

2. One canopy inflated, another deploying
-a. Attempt to contain the deploying reserve or main
canopy and stuff it between your legs.
-b. If the second canopy deployment is inevitable and
there is sufficient altitude, disconnect the reserve
static line and cut away the main.
-c. If the second deployment is inevitable and there
is insufficient altitude for a cutaway, wait for inflation of the second canopy and evaluate the result.
(1) The two open canopies typically settle into one of three configurations, biplane, side-byside, or downplane.
(2) Trying to force one configuration into a more
manageable configuration is typically futile
and can be dangerous.

3. Stable biplane
-a. Unstow the brakes on the front canopy and recover gently to full flight.
-b. Leave the brakes stowed on the rear canopy.
-c. Steer the front canopy only as necessary to maneuver for a safe landing.
-d. Use minimal control input as necessary
for landing.
-e. Perform a parachute landing fall.

4. Stable side-by-side (choose one procedure):

Side-by-side procedure 1:
If both canopies are flying without interference or
possibility of entanglement and altitude permits:
(1) Disconnect the RSL.
(2) Cut away the main and steer the reserve to a normal landing.

Side-by-side procedure 2:
Land both canopies.
(1) Release the brakes of the dominant canopy (larger and more overhead) and steer gently with the toggles.
(2) Land without flaring and perform a parachute landing fall.

5. Downplane or pinwheel (canopies spinning around each other)
-a. Disconnect the reserve static line if altitude permits.
-b. Cut away the main canopy and steer the reserve to a normal landing.

6. Main-reserve entanglement
-a. Attempt to clear the problem by retrieving the less-inflated canopy.
-b. Perform a parachute landing fall.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just another one-- not in the SIM as far as I can see, but i was taught by one instructor that in a side-by-side, you use one rear riser from each canopy (maybe this advice was specific to my set-up, two comparable seven cells, a PR-R 175 and a Triathlon 175) and basically steer gently and backwards, i.e. the canopy on the right, you grab that canopy's left rear riser, and vice versa, so you are steering (if needing to steer, obviously make minimal inputs) in "reverse" so to speak. Anyone else heard this or comments? This was from one of my AFFIs, unless I misunderstood, which is also possible, lol...

blues,
R
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." Gandhi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The logic behind this is that you are always turning the canopys towards each other. In other words to turn to the right you initiate a right hand turn on the left hand canopy. The left hand canopy then gently pushes the right hand canopy around as well.
This is to minimise the chances of a downplane developing which can occur if the canopys are turned away from each other.
They are both out there and enjoying each others company, so do not disturb. If you have to then keep them close. :)


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

and basically steer gently and backwards,



The full version of the Canadian PIM description mentions steering a side by side: You gently turn one canopy INTO the other, to keep them together, rather than AWAY from each other, which would tend to separate them into a downplane.

Thus to turn left, turn the right canopy left (with its left rear riser as normal for riser turns). Sounds like that was what was being taught, even though I'm not sure I'd call it "reverse".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's free!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
0