JohanW

I think a square diamond and a thin rhombus are equally pretty, and in terms of a formation equal enough not to matter.

It's not that I want looser criteria, but both will make a random onlooker go "oooooooooh pretty," and that is what I would want to achieve. Not "ooooooh within 2% of the dive plan." You want to make it objective, binary, pass or fail, but if you can have rules that encourage flying pretty formations instead of rules that demand major flying skill, I know what I would prefer.

I seem to remember people wanting rules for judging pretty formations as valid and ugly formations as invalid. Where did that change into rules to needlessly require as much skill as possible? I simply don't see that as the intention of having judging rules.

Quote

Picture 3. UNIFORM distortion, skewed (the diagonals of the diamond are no longer at 90 degrees to each other). All the cells are the same shape and size, but no longer square.

Even though this affects the dimensional symmetry of the resulting formation, in my opinion this can be allowed as well.

A Grid System can have its grid adjusted to fit over this, I think, but for a Polka Dot System you would need to consider lines pointing left apart from lines pointing right. Then it would again work, I think.

Quote

Quote

Pretty cool.
I think in general, the stretch is the only thing which can occur, even with perfect sightlines. Allowing a minimal scaling of the grid sideways (in/out) to conform the formation (within a certain limit, of a few %) seems reasonable. As it means you can have perfect spacing, flying and distances between each jumper, a formation that's as pretty as you'll ever see, yet a formation that's not 100% confirming to the planned dive.

So, for a starting point (and allowing later change in the light of experience) what amount of stretch (+ or -) do you think is a reasonable allowance? 10%? 25%?

For reference, the stretched diamond I posted earlier has been stretched 30% along the line of flight. I'd consider that not acceptable.

Reminding you of your own post, I agree with your then opinion that all homogeneous distortion is acceptable. I would not put a maximum on it either.
Yes, that means distances between flyers can be ridiculously great. That's much, much less of a problem than Yuri scatter, and the real world will find a reasonable optimum anyway, because you can't fly a grid spanning a state.
Yes, it means you can brief a wide diamond and fly a tall one. I don't see that as a problem, the symmetry of the formation doesn't change.

World Record 35 ship formation

Honestly? Make up your mind. What do you want out of your second canopy?

If it's to be a back-to-back rig, get another Sabre2. You can learn nothing on a Lotus or a Safire2 you can't learn faster, better and safer on your Sabre2 (because you already have it and won't be mixing canopies, not because the Sabre2 is inherently safer or anything).

If you want to do something else entirely on your second rig, get just a second canopy on risers, maybe with a bag and pilot if you're especially lazy (like me
If you simply have money to burn and want a complete second rig because you can, save your money and get coaching or make jumps with it.

The question you're asking is too general and lacks sufficient information to give a useful answer to. I like the Lotus and the Safire. I actually didn't like the Sabre 2 (but might now - it's been a while), but I do like (in no particular order) Sabre 1, Stiletto, Pilot, Vision, Katana, Triathlon, Spectre, Crossfire, Silhouette, Foil, Diablo, Manta , Navigator, Sensei, Lightning, Balance, Quadra, Techno (though not often you like, and want?

A Lightning, Storm or Triathlon in CRW-setup, or a Foil. Would not recommend a Foil 150 though.

So?

Quote

In Elsinore, in both records, 71 and 68 -way it could have been possible to fly in the formation with a trackingsuit....Impact or Prodigy... There has to be a definition how fast or slow the formation is falling to be a FLYING formation.

The 2008 71-way was doing about 70 mph down. I have no data on forward speed, but it definitely felt like flying to me. If a tall, light person can do that in a Prodigy, good for them, but I was glad to have my trusty S3S. So I do not agree with your specific comment on the 71-way. I was not on the 68-way, so I can't comment on that.

In general, I do agree it needs to be a flown formation, not a falling formation. My gut says the Elsinore formations qualify (at least the 71-way). But how do you quantify that? Glide ratio? Dress code? No bent legs? Yuri's Seal of Approval?

What I'm missing in both current systems is allowing for angular distortion. The USPA system requires squares, the other system also has something with defined 90° or 45° angles. (I can't be bothered to look up exact references, sorry.) What's wrong with other angles? The "Judging a WRW formation" thread (again, can't be bothered to find a link, sorry) led me (not speaking for anybody else here, besides possibly Kallend, who I remember agreeing with this) to the conclusion that any shape of regular diamond would do. That would allow for easier judging of photos taken from slightly off to one side as well.

OK, that's done. First six jumps of 2010 were out of Eurocopter Ecureuil D-HEHF.
1st Eurocup Paraski 2010 Gosau .at. I managed to keep two Austrians, a German and a Czech behind me, coming in 43rd of 47 total.

If there are XP drivers for that machine, and things like sleep and hibernate work as well under XP as under W7, I don't see a reason why not. You could even take Microsoft to task and demand the license fee back. It's been done. Your Windows XP has been paid for already.

But if it comes with Windows 7, you might as well try it with that first, see if it works for you. It might.

They help for a *lot* of people, including world champions.

Dress for success.

For RW, that means booties.

Post it on YouTube and disable comments.

Skydivingmovies.com has been offline for a while, done in by its own success; bandwidth became too expensive I believe.

Vimeo is the new black YouTube, quality is better and there are less whuffos about it would seem.

Quote

Is the recovery arc of the Aerodyne Pilot too short for swooping? (I want to be as safe as possible)

No you don't. If you wanted safety first, last and only, you wouldn't be jumping, let alone swooping.

So with that out of the way, make do with what you have and know, or get something admittedly better suited, learn to fly that first and learn to swoop later.

Is a Pilot ideal? No, it's not. Can it be done? Yes. You will be learning some things you will have to unlearn later anyway.

Take it slow, get all the coaching you can, accept there's going to be risk and minimise it. Have fun, be safe.

It's more difficult to pack, it rips and tears more catastrophically than ZP and it sticks together when left packed for prolonged periods of time. Off the top of my head. (Do a search? )

Quote

Quote

.. The Silhouette is the best kept secret in skydiving ..

.. But I'll add that the Pulse is possibly the next gen Silhouette ..

Or would it be more appropriate to describe the Pulse as the next canopy after the Silhouette, in terms of progression?

I've had it explained to me that with the Pulse, PD filled the gap between the Silhouette and the Stiletto, as they did with the Sabre 2 between the Silhouette and the Katana.

Quote

If you have the opportunity to demo a Pulse, it might be a good thing.

Always sound advice. Demo, demo, demo.

Quote

.. But everyone I know who has tried them say that Silhouettes and Pulses are easy to pack even when brand new.

No experience with the Pulse, but almost 500 jumps on varying sizes of Silhouettes. Yes, it is PD's best kept secret (except, I'm happy to hear, on OP's DZ, apparently). I (heart) Silhouettes. My most recent Silhouette jump was on a 240, wingload .9. I was amazed *again*. (OK, it said Navigator on the label. Same canopy.) But I have limited jumps on Pilots, and I liked them as well.

I never had real problems packing parachutes, and a lot of my early (first, well, 500 or so
OP: all of the above are very good canopies. Demo all of them, in your current size, find out which one *you* like best. Then demo a size smaller, and see if you like that better. You may, you may not.

If my own experiences are anything to go by, on your first flight in the bigger suit you'll be amazed at the forward speed increase, the lift increase and the actual ease of flying it. Nothing will go wrong and it'll be a lot of fun. No tongue in cheek here, just a damn huge smile.

Then, after ten or twenty or even thirty jumps, something will go wrong, this will of course be on a rodeo with someone, you'll go unstable after exit and you'll be spinning on your back. You'll try to fix the exit for too long because it's not just *your* jump you've just screwed, and you'll be spinning on your back for a couple of thousand feet because you honestly can't remember how to get out of the backspin once you've been in it for a while. (Did I mention you were trying to fix it for too long because it wasn't just *your* jump .. ?) It sounds stupid, but it's not beyond possible. I *know*. (This was on an S3S.)

The only saving grace is you actually *had* several thousand feet to spin on your back, because you were not yet doing rodeos from 5, which you did not start doing until you felt even more comfortable *and* you had had the good luck, not planning, luck, to have f*cked up an exit from 12. Later, when you do a medium f*ck up on a rodeo from 5, you might actually be able to get it stable and flying before break-off with the video guy. Oh, and rider unmount. If this sounds like I've done stupid shit, well, nobody's perfect. Rodeos are big fun BTW. But stay with small girls or small suits. Well, for a while.

If you are "able to hold a heading" in the Firebird, I have my doubt you are flying it to its potential. If your heading isn't exactly where you want it, all the time every time, you would have me worried in that Mach 1. And it took me more jumps than 20 to really learn to fly my GTi, giving maximum legs and adjusting with the arms, which I consider something you should have down pat before becoming a lazy flyer in your Mach 1. That one is so big you'll be needing its entire range almost never, and maxing it out is something you might not even manage for a whole flight, so the only way to experience and practice truly max flight is now, in your Firebird. And the spin you can get in in a Mach 1 is a *lot* more impressive, too.

What you should really be prepared for is not wanting to jump your Firebird anymore after having jumped that Mach 1 once. (Never demo a suit you can't immediately buy! Another thing I did wrong .. ) You can probably get away with jumping the Mach 1 on solos. But there still are things to learn and develop on your Firebird, and the temptation to jump your Mach 1, also on formation jumps, and even bigger formation jumps with more stress, where you can f*ck up royally, might be too high. And your learning curve on the Mach 1 will be flatter than on the Firebird. Everything you can learn on the Firebird *will* translate to the Mach 1. You can learn things better, faster and easier on the Firebird, and you will not be wanting to fly it.

Or I may be unique, or maybe you're just better than I was. No tongue in cheek there, it's a real possibility. But not one I or you can assess. I'd like to be unique And maybe not. F*cking up is a good learning experience, especially if you survive.

Quote

1. Pay the ticket and get the points on my License 180ish. It didn't matter if I was 1MPH over, or 25 MPH over.

2. Take differed adjudication for 125ish. I just had to not get a ticket for the next 6 mths. No points

3. Take a driving class for 140ish. No points.

4. Take it to court and pay 200ish in court costs.

Which do you think I and almost everyone else does?

After looking at that... How can you NOT see it as a revenue generation system?

So you took option 2 and were careful not to speed for 6 months?

I'd say it works. For 6 months. So maybe they should make it a year instead of 6 months.
(Assuming you mean deferred, not differed.)

Quote

A lot of the shorter people @ Teuge have or have had Atoms for a first (or 2nd...) rig. An Atom 00 L1 or L2 (or shortened L3) is quite popular as it will hold a hybrid 170 (or very old sabre 1 , spectre etc) down to a ZP 120. Only problem there is the 126/128 sqft reserve. Of course we do see Atoms 00 with bigger reserves like Mayday 156 sqft, Techno 158, PD-R143 stuffed in there sometimes, but that seems to me an all around bad idea (also Kees says it is, so there!).

Weird. I have an Atom single 0 L3 (one size larger), in which I have packed .. a 170 (hybrid), a 150, a 135, a 120 (7-cell) and a 111 (XB). All of which fit nicely (the 170 was tight, but I had a *very* short loop even then); I have decent loop tension on even the smaller canopies. And my rigger doesn't complain about the reserve, which would be .. a Techno 155 (not 158).

Newer Atoms have multiple attachment points for the loop, and in this way allow for (even?) more sizes to be packed in it while still having normal tension on the loop and the main flaps. However, I would advise against ordering a new Atom. Shame, really, they are very nice containers.

90375
/
179
=
504.89

Not yet - was going to make my Velocity jump (a borrowed 111) but clouds (a solid layer of them) between 1500 and 2000 made that a bad plan - the whole load landed with the plane (a Grand Caravan).

Next try next weekend - hopefully from a piston 182.

If that's not going to happen either, next one should be from a turbine helicopter - with a Foil, in the Alps.

One possible conclusion is you don't want to jump a 140. Another possible conclusion is you might want to jump a 135.

Rules aside (breaking rules is almost never smart), I*'d probably let you jump a 135 on a nice sunny day with medium winds, if I'd seen you fly your 155. Let you make up your own mind. Size isn't everything, lots of other design factors come into play. Line length, cell pressure, planform, airfoil, trim .. you might be better off under a Sabre 1 135, or under a Pilot 140, or a Silhouette 150. I don't know. To me, a 155, even a square one at .9:1, is high performance. A 135 is higher performance. I couldn't say if *you* are a high performance pilot. Or an even higher performance one.

You do want to be current to demo, demo, demo. So maybe waiting for the season isn't a bad plan. Get some first hand advice from someone who has seen you fly and land. And if you can't get a demo, how are you going to get your next canopy?

* But I am not your instructor. Talk to your instructor.

I'll give you I don't pack reserves. I only flat pack some mains.

I doubt you would know the difference between a 135, a 139 and a 140 if it wasn't on the label.

If you don't want to jump a 135, you don't want to jump a 140.

By which measurement?

That's the whole point, isn't it?

If you're loading a 150 at 1.0, consider a Silhouette. Also, do not rule out a Storm or Spectre.

If you can find one, try a PdF Electra. (But that's French, and you seem to be in the US.)

Demo, demo, demo. You'll know when you've found your next canopy.