sundevil777

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    8,171

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

  • Feedback

    0%

Posts posted by sundevil777

  1. 14 hours ago, eric.fradet said:

    This rig will soon be grounded in France

    As discussed earlier in the thread, a smaller pilot chute cap is a proven countermeasure for small rigs with fully enclosed pc.  Do you know if that or other changes are being considered?

  3. Posted

    https://jediairwear.co.uk/2022/02/g35-cookie-helmet/

    I came upon this while wandering gear sites, looks like some interesting features that might be good for photographers and tunnel flyers.  It certainly looks like a new design in many ways such as the front chin vent, but can't find info on the cookie website or elsewhere.  I don't remember this being introduced, wondering if it had a very short life on the market or what?  

  4. 33 minutes ago, glh said:

    You leave something in my reseve  packjob that doesn't belong and If i survive there is going to more than just a discussion about what happened

    Of course it is clear what that slotted plate is.  They were likely doing a lot of tests, with a lot of re-closing of the container.  If in the rush to do many tests the mistake of leaving the plate was made, it should be admitted instead of silence we've had since that video was released.  I do understand now that the plate is likely not relevant to the situation, as certainly we can all see there's more to this than just a couple guys setting up a failure on purpose or by neglect.  Again, it would be nice if the plate would be acknowledged, but I no longer think it matters.

  5. Posted

    Please help me understand why a suit which is specifically marketed as an indoor suit might not be so great for skydiving.  Used suits designed for the tunnel might be a good deal if it fits my desire to have something relatively tight instead of my belly suits for the occasional freakflying experiments.  Is it a matter of durability, grippers? Thank you.

  10. · Edited by sundevil777

    54 minutes ago, sundevil777 said:

    this one?

    https://skyer.online/en/shop

    Are Russian skylife Vega/Sirius/Orion altimeters popular over there?

    I only switched to a digital alti after 30 years with analog.  I first bought a Viso II, but quickly switched and found a used Neptune II.

    The Skyer has some of the same negatives as the Viso/Ares.  The font is a very low aspect ratio, and uses the simpler, awful 7 segment type display. I find the Neptune/N3/Atlas display much easier to read because of the higher aspect ratio and rounded font. It is easy to dismiss the importance of this, but it is real.

    Also, the Skyer and Viso/Ares show too many digits in freefall, Showing beyond the "hundreds" digit for feet is not useful, and becomes a distracting blur. Even when using meters, 2 digits is probably enough,I doubt a third digit is useful.

  11. 11 hours ago, colognebilly said:

    Hi, i think to buy a Skyer Altimeter but i cant find a lot over the device, i like the big Display and the charging function, are there any people here wich use(d) this altimeter and can tell me Do you like it or not and is it trustworthy? Cheers and thanks, Markus 

    this one?

    https://skyer.online/en/shop

    Are Russian skylife Vega/Sirius/Orion altimeters popular over there?

  12. · Edited by sundevil777

    On 11/19/2021 at 10:13 AM, chuckakers said:

    Looks like to me as well. What the hell was it doing in the pack?

    Whether accidental or intentional, it hasn't been explained, and is important.

  16. · Edited by sundevil777

    7 hours ago, Binary93 said:

    I'd chop the main. If the risers are free, the canopy can't inflate.
    I'm only hypothesizing now about could've/would've/should've (note I have only ~400 jumps), but because you didn't chop it immediately, you allowed it to inflate, spin, and get risers entangled into that ball of $h!t which is why it remained inflated even later after you chopped. If you had chopped it immediately and cleared the risers, it would hopefully hang only on the bridle/PC and wouldn't interfere with the flight as much.

    Of course the canopy can inflate. It depends on how much force it takes to clear the risers. Cutting away and clearing the risers first could take the rest of a person's life.

    The landing could have been gentle. The trouble with the canopy trailing from the foot would have been minimized by just taking control of the reserve canopy and going into fairly deep brakes. Slow your airspeed and the canopy would not have so much drag. Even if a person lands that way with little to no flare, it would have been better than the unguided crash.

    • Like 1

  18. 22 hours ago, michaelmullins said:

    Actually, no.  Military jumpers rarely go higher than 25,000'.  For the US Military it takes a General Officer's signature for jumps higher than 25,000', so I have been told by some knowledgeable military contacts. There is no market for military jumps from this aircraft.  This aircraft is to be used to make 41,000' jumps by those who can afford such jumps and wish to set records that will most likely stand forever.

     

    Might it also have been you really WANTED it!?

  20. 8 hours ago, bsrodeo540 said:

    I agree with all of that, but was wondering if I am missing something. 

    On that note, I am looking for recommendations for a 'best' modern rig brand/model/size that would hold 90 crossbraced with a 143 standard reserve (not an LV)? If such combo is hard to come by, then perhaps 126 reserve? I have not done much research yet, just want to get a general feel and opinions from anyone who happen to jump a similar combo.

    Edit - I am currently jumping a 105 main that packs a little bigger (maybe a 115) with a 150 old(ish) Microraven reserve. My rig is sized so that I can't go any lower on the main and my reserve fits tight, so looking to switch pretty soon to something that would give me room to downsize to a 90(ish) crossbraced with a 143/126 reserve that isn't packed too tight (but not loose either).

    The microraven has a reputation for being very sensitive to higher wingloading, with unexpected/sudden stalls slamming people on their back.  That is just my memory of forum threads from years ago, a search would confirm more details. 

  21. · Edited by sundevil777

    2 hours ago, IJskonijn said:

    There are thousands of possible reasons for a reserve hesitation that are NOT the fault of the manufacturer. I'm not saying that it cannot possibly ever be the fault of the manufacturer, but I AM saying that you're jumping to conclusions awfully fast. And Aerodyne does indicate why an excessive long closing loop is bad: it doesn't compress the pilot chute fully and reduces its effectiveness significantly.

    If we as riggers in the world are to improve the safety of skydiving equipment everywhere, we need to keep an open mind AND be thorough, detailed and open in our analysis. Baseless accusations are worth less than the electricity used to transmit them. If you want me to take you seriously, show what that rig is exactly. What reserve is in it? What main is it in? What AAD is in it? What length is the closing loop? What size exactly is the rig? How was it packed? How was it tested? What exactly did you observe in the failures? Where did stuff catch that wasn't supposed to catch? It's like high school math, just writing down the final number is not enough, you've got to show the work done.

    Pretty please with sugar on top, show the f*ing details. Otherwise, I'm bringing the beer to Baksteen's popcorn party.

    Did anyone address what that metal pull-up slotted plate was doing in there?  A person could conclude the video was intentionally set-up to fail, but the plate just fell out so obviously?

    • Like 1

  22. · Edited by sundevil777

    On 3/23/2021 at 12:32 AM, bsrodeo540 said:

    What’s everyone’s opinion on small reserves? I get it it’s all relative and I heard an opinion that ideally reserve should be close to the size of the main, which supposedly should be easier to deal with in the event of double out, but personally I’ve been reluctant to downsize my reserve, rig specs permitting. I’m flying 105 main with a 150 reserve now, I’m a smaller dude so might consider 126 in the future, but overall my attitude is that my reserve is my last line of defense and so far I can’t justify the benefit of a smaller and slicker rig at the expense of reduced safety (i.e. spinning linetwists). I guess it also is somewhat discipline-specific?

    I think the Infinity by Velocity Sports Equipment is one of the best rigs at offering different size main and reserve combinations. The Racer if my memory is correct is also versatile in what can be ordered.

    Perhaps others can correct me if other mfgs also are as flexible in what can be offered.

    I have the good sense to have a 210 main at a WL of 1.12, and a 220 reserve. I've been well served by having low WL on the square reserve rides I've had.

    Anyway, I was wondering what you all thought of how much flexibility there is from mfgs in general to being able to combine a 100 main with a 200 reserve as just an example. I don't know if any mfg can do that.  Perhaps it is really difficult as the number of combinations forces many different flap sizes and unintended interactions. Of course the demand is just not there.  Until there is a demand for it, a 1.7 reserve WL on a swooping rig will be considered normal.

  24. I think that using non-zero porosity fabric on the lower skin does not result in lower performance.

    When a wing is flying at high angles of attack (such as during a flared landing), it is very important that the airflow over the top of the wing stay "attached"/not separate from the surface of the wing. If air is leaking out through the top skin fabric too much, then I think it has the effect of separating the airflow. Conditions on the bottom skin of the wing are very different, with separation not being an issue, so leakage through non-ZP fabric on the bottom doesn't matter.

    If it was possible to actually suck air into the wing through/from the top skin, then you get the ability to produce good lift at even higher angles of attack, as the airflow stays attached when it otherwise would not. This has been done on some experimental airplanes, including a Boeing 757 testbed that had part of the wing drilled with very tiny holes and a vacuum applied to suck air into the wing. So, air leaking out through the fabric matters a lot for the top skin, but not for the bottom, as long as it is not so much that cell pressurization suffers.

    That's my theory on why non zp is being applied on bottom skins, and I think it makes sense. In my previous life I was a mechanical design engineer, even did such for the Boeing company.