catyduck

Thanks, pchapman and Southern Man. Really helpful reply and link. If anyone knows of data that has been published, I would be very interested. I did not ask earlier, precisely because the thread was about overstuffing a rig at that point. The discussion seemed to have turned more towards altitude for deployment. Thanks again.

(Apologies for jumping back a couple days' worth of conversation) The video caption mentions a "low drag pilot chute." (a) This seems like a bad idea? (with the understanding that you don't want an insta-stop at e.g. terminal head-down) Why would you do this? (b) How do you know if your container has a low drag reserve pilot chute? Are there specific models and DOMs someone could point to?

Thanks, airtwardo. Yeah, I'm sure I didn't mean every possible combination ("now, let's dig up this canopy that ceased production in 1990, but hey, it's the right size..."). But I'm surprised they aren't required to test the extreme ends, the soft-soft and tight-tight fit with a representative canopy pair. My first reserve ride was a total mal on a friend's stuffed or overstuffed (pretty sure the latter) rig. Threads like this are scary. I have not seen this particular question discussed, so: Is there any danger in choosing a container size to allow a soft fit on your desired reserve size? (within manufacturer specs...but if they only have to test one size, how do you know which one...)

Does it? I thought it was, they have done tests for the recommended range. Outside of that, you are on your own. Due to number of variables, different types of same-size canopy, impossibility of testing all conditions, etc. Definitely curious now.

A (mainly) 182 dropzone that manages to be a great experience for fun jumpers, solo students, and tandems! The focus is always on becoming a better, safer skydiver. From your first tandem you have the chance to deploy and help fly and land the canopy. Then even after finishing off your A license, the staff is always watching and offering tips to improve canopy control and freefall skills, no matter how busy they are. My first reserve ride was on a tandem-crazy day--and I can't tell you what a big impression it made on me that the DZO and S&TA *both* came out to pick me up (read: make sure I was okay and find out whether I dealt properly with the malfunction). The rental gear is inspected every 25 jumps, and I've overheard several visiting pilots comment that the 182 is in the nicest shape they've seen. There is a good and uncliquey core of fun jumpers at many experience levels, some who travel from other DZs frequently because jumping at Plymouth is such a great experience, others who are homegrown and have been given every reason to stay loyal. Especially if you show up on a weekend, don't plan on jumping solo!

Are these problems linked to overstuffed containers, i.e., BEYOND the manufacturers' specifications? Or could they result from prolonged use with a "tight"-fitting main and/or "tight" reserve?

I think I get what you're asking. To use the example given: An Icon I4 is a tight or full fit with a 150 Smart reserve and a 150 9-cell main, says Aerodyne. SO if your already-chosen combination of canopies is a Smart 150 and, say, a Sabre2 150, would you be better off choosing an I5 (or another manufacturer)? If you had chosen a similarly-sized reserve that packs a bit smaller (Tempo 150, PD143), would it make the fit in the I4 less tight/safer?

[email]Hi, everyone, I'd like to travel to Someplace Warm, USA over the winter and get in some concentrated jumping. I was wondering if anyone knew of a place that offers a sort of camp or dedicated course focused on checking off the B license requirements. I've gotten a couple of recommendations for canopy courses, but I would also need water training, the test, etc. An actual intentional water landing would be a bonus! But definitely not a requirement. I'm in the Midwest and it will almost certainly be cheaper for me to fly, so the dz would need to have non-tent housing (or, I guess, rentals) or a close and cheap motel. Thanks in advance! I really want to go into next season with my B license so I can get in on spring night jumps. :) ETA: Apologies if this post belongs in "places to jump." Please move if necessary, thanks!

Do you mean in terms of canopy characteristics, like 7 cell vs 9 cell, semi-elliptical vs elliptical vs square, main vs reserve etc? Or straight-up comparisons of similar canopies, like Safire2 vs Pilot? General overviews are good for the first type. For the second, I actually learned a lot reading the gear reviews section here on dropzone.com. Also, the manufacturers' websites have descriptions of "flight characteristics" for their different canopies which are really helpful. (And in my extremely limited demo experience, pretty accurate.)

Please forgive the confused newbie question, but...aren't tight and tapered potentially different factors, with one connected more to the size of the reserve than the fit of the container?

It's as a holiday present? Ask for the N3. If you don't like it, you can sell it "like new," buy one of the others, and still have some money left over.

Thanks for the help, everyone. I did not realize that "Me? I'll be fine" means the same thing as, "A good reserve size for you? Well...how many bones are you okay with breaking?"

Sorry to be confusing. I'm wondering why a 150 sq ft canopy can be considered "high performance" on the basis of size alone (USPA SIM), but people are okay jumping sub-150 reserves and expecting to land all right with them even if they are unconscious. Is it flight characteristics? Packing method? etc. (To be clear: I have my reserve and am comfortable with its size; I am not looking for people to tell me I'll be just fine under something smaller. )

Apart from the "smaller rigs look cooler" phenomenon, there seem to be two basic pieces of advice for choosing a reserve size: 1. Pick something that could (not "will definitely") land you relatively safely even without control input 2. Don't choose something smaller than your main. If you're not comfortable with the canopy size in normal conditions, don't try to make things worse when you're stressed The people giving this advice are in many (not all!) cases very experienced jumpers loading their reserves north of 1.2. Novice jumpers are generally required/recommended to stay with a WL around 1.0. So...is this saying that a novice flying a reserve to the ground is potentially more dangerous than a reserve landing an unconscious jumper? Oh, and a second question. The USPA considers any canopy 150 or smaller high performance, simply based on length of lines and number of air molecules that can fit underneath. Reserves have different flight characteristics than mains, but...is this still true? Do reserve packing method and flight characteristics mitigate the effect? (And if an Optimum handles more like a main, is a smaller Optimum then "high performance"?)

I understand prioritizing safety. I hope you can find a soft-opening 190 canopy to use in the meantime.

Like Katscan, I obtained goggles, (analog) altimeter, and helmet before or around the time of my A license. Also a weight belt, but you might not have that problem. I actually ended up with four pairs of goggles, all donated to me by fun jumpers at the DZ who traded them in for full-face helmets. Which, by the way, I bought for myself as an A license present. There is a cool factor there, not gonna lie--but more to the point, it is really, really nice to have the closed visor on chilly morning jumps right now! I can imagine it will only get more useful as fall turns to winter. (nb: Your DZ might not allow full-face helmets until you are off student status--mine doesn't--so be sure to check on that) But be sure to ask around a little about googles. Also regarding colder weather: I started jumping with thin, "summer" weight gloves a couple weeks ago, because I know I will need heavy ones in the winter. It does not seem prudent to go from nothing to thick. But you'd also want to make sure gloves are okay on student status.

It took me about two weeks of casual looking to get an idea of what was out there and how much people were selling it for, and two weeks of seriously looking to find something just about perfect. If Wings makes a stock harness size that fits you, I guarantee you would have had an easier time finding something than I did. (Mirage makes stock rigs for little people! Go, Mirage! ...if I could afford one.) I'm not knocking your decision (or Wings), just trying to help out other smaller jumpers who might read this and worry that they're SOL.

"Learning to skydive was a financially responsible decision," said nobody, ever. ~ This is a really interesting discussion. I'm having a lot of fun piecing together my first rig (currently demoing a couple of lovely mains...I'm sure I'll end up buying whatever used 150* shows up, though). But most of the new/er jumpers at my DZ have ended up buying a completely new rig, which seems odd to me given everything I've heard from actually-experienced jumpers. So it is eye-opening to read the different perspectives. I guess not everybody's mental "rig math" starts with, "So, after my cutaway main lands in the Fire Swamp..." I guess we all have our splurges. I spent a LOT more than I had planned on my reserve, of all things--it seemed worth it to get the size and model that I had already successfully landed under pressure (on not-my-gear, which was a little embarrassing). And my Cypres is new; that's the one thing I'm sort of counting on to have resale value if necessary (see above comment for my general philosophy/expectation). I don't think that there is any more of an implicit downsize expectation in buying used versus new; no container is built for one size main only. And even if it were, you could change that with hybrid canopies, Dacron vs microline, etc. I don't know. I am so in love with my rig; I want to have its children and read them bedtime stories. I can't imagine that I would feel any more strongly if I had gotten it custom-made for me. But if people didn't buy new, then I wouldn't have nearly-new gear to buy secondhand. So--yes! Keep buying new, everyone! And then sell it to me for cheap! (*150 main: instructor recommended, WL .9 on a bad day)

That's the killer. It's already a damned expensive sport, do we really want to be raising the cost of entry if we don't have to? Hell, my FJC, 25 jumps, USPA membership and A license cost me under $900. I don't mean back in the 70s, this was in the mid 2000s. If I was looking at $3k for the same thing, I wouldn't be a jumper today. Incidentally, my DZ offers the option of a true AFF first jump. However, it winds up being the same price as two tandems, and that's assuming you don't have to repeat it. They do strongly encourage people who want to learn to skydive, to do the tandem progression instead of AFF. A tandem progression also works really well for people like me, who *don't* know that skydiving is something we need to do, until after we've done it. At least at my DZ, the attitude towards every first tandem is, "So, you like it? Well, that's your first step towards your solo license..." So for people who are dropping those $200 on a first tandem regardless, it doesn't really increase the cost. I do think I would have been frustrated with the time/cost of *three* tandems, though. I'm not going to pretend I did a ton of research on different programs before starting, I basically did what the closest dropzone offers --but A license packages around here are US$2700-3000 regardless of AFF or AFP. I think static line would have been a little cheaper overall. But not 900, wow!

At my DZ, AFP starts with two tandems. Then solo jumps are with only one instructor from the beginning. Obviously I'm biased b/c everyone thinks their training method is best , but here are the advantages from the perspective of someone who just did the program: -longer, more structured program (18 jumps) that incorporates AFF coach jumps--basically designed to get you to your A license instead of floundering around or getting lost in the shuffle post-AFF -emphasis on canopy skills with each level, not just freefall. I had the A license canopy skills section filled out by jump 10 or 11, IIRC. (Well...except the accuracy bits, ha!) -fewer new freefall skills jammed into each level => less intimidating, get more practice on each I have the impression that AFP is more geared towards converting students (at least, successful ones) into licensed jumpers, but what do I know.

Maybe I will see you in the sky! I'm glad you're finding gear that works better. You could ask in the disabilities forum, maybe, if anyone has had success adapting a magnifying lens to the face of an Altimaster? I just got a little worried to see you blame a radio mishap, changing winds, your instructor, ill-fitting goggles, and your altimeter for...actually, I'm not sure what, exactly. Having to repeat AFF2? Heck, most people end up repeating a level or three. You still fell from the sky, had so much fun you want to do it again, and walked away from the landing. That's not a failure, that's amazing!

Think about "personal responsibility" and reread your original post. ;)

My FJC emphasized personal responsibility. It also taught me to PLF. How about yours?