Kenzdik96

Members
  • Content

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    N/A
  • Country

    Russian Federation

Community Reputation

16 Neutral

Gear

  • Container Other
    Vector 3
  • Main Canopy Size
    96
  • Main Canopy Other
    NZ JFX2
  • Reserve Canopy Size
    143
  • Reserve Canopy Other
    PD Optimum
  • AAD
    MarS

Jump Profile

  • Home DZ
    Skydive Primorye
  • License
    D
  • Number of Jumps
    600
  • Tunnel Hours
    15
  • Years in Sport
    3
  • Freefall Photographer
    Yes

Ratings and Rigging

  • Static Line
    Instructor
  • IAD
    Instructor
  • USPA Coach
    No
  • Pro Rating
    No
  • Wingsuit Instructor
    No
  • Rigging Back
    Senior Rigger

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Over here, they are somewhat popular, maybe a third of the jumpers use them. Openings are rather good, as they help reduce the linetwists, as the bag is.more stable when leaving the rig. Improvement in speed of deployment is marginal, and so is the improvement in speed of packing. My primary reason for using them is less line twists, and fewer rubber bands to change out.
  2. Yeah, if you decide on modifying the rig yourself I would recommend talking to a professional about it (if you are not one yourself), or if you are inclined to perform some DIY rigging, at least doing way more research than the person who did the modification in the picture above. I would for start look into military tandem systems, NAA makes some that are (probably) legal to jump in the USA, but I don't know if they will sell them to civilians. If that fails (or if legal to jump in the USA is not a requirement for you), you can find expired Strong tandems relatively cheap and use those, or alternatively, there are some non TSOd manufacturers in Russia / Eastern Europe who will happily sell you a military (or regular) tandem for not that much money (although some are of dubious quality), and equally happily sew you any kind of "passenger" harness you ask for.
  3. I stand corrected, I haven't seen any Icarus or Parachute Systems reserves, I have checked the Icarus (NZ) reserve manual and the Icarus (World) manuals, they both have the checkboxes, couldn't find a manual for the decelerator. People around here mostly jump Smart, Techno, and PD stuff, so I didn't really have that much contact with Icarus reserves. You learn something every day :)
  4. Only on PD reserves, AFAIK other manufacturers don't require any markings on the reserve.
  5. That looked like something a 20 jump student would do unintentionally, low toggle turn followed by trying to flare it out in the bank instead of trying to arrest the turn.
  6. Yes, you are right that optimizing a canopy for openings alone will lead to F111 as a choice of material. However, there is more to a main (and even a wingsuit main) than openings alone. For start, an average wingsuit canopy will have more jumps in one month than a reserve will in its lifetime. While your openings need to be without linetwists, they don't have to be as short as those of a reserve, as comfort is one of the considerations as well. And finally, as it is your main, it needs to get you back from that long spot you will inevitably find yourself landing at if you are doing wingsuit. With todays cfd technology, it is possible to design a zp wingsuit main that will have all the performance you need (opening and flight) without having to resort to f111 unless pack volume is the major consideration.
  7. I did say "with a Vector, you can't really do much with a bottom mounted closing loop" I've known about that series, they did change it back to bottom flap rather soon though. Good info for the ones who didn't know about that series (without highjacking the topic and going into the pros and cons of both systems).
  8. I believe he said that his wannabe wingsuit rig is a Vector with an OP 193, and he is jumping a 120 in his primary rig (which he didn't specify the make, size, or reserve). So with a Vector, you can't really do much with a bottom mounted closing loop in terms of over-shortening it (you will just wind up touching the grommets together), but you can have a go with a larger main Dbag, or having your reserve packed to be bottom stiff and push the AAD out. Alternatively, you can get a regular pack volume ZP wingsuit main like the WinX or Pilot7. ZP will give you better flight characteristics, and since you already have a rig that holds a 150 standard, and you want to put a 150 in it, you will really experience no benefits from going for an ultra low pack volume option.
  9. Exactly which problem are you attempting to solve? Is your main too loose in your container, and not putting enough pressure on the closing loop, keeping the pin unsecure? On some rigs where the closing loop is located at the top (Javelin), you can shorten it to "compress" the main dbag and help keep a smaller than spec main secure. Putting in an oversized main dbag can also help, as it will allow the canopy to keep some air in it and fill more space in the container. Putting a maximum possible size of reserve in the rig can also help with keeping an undersized main in check. Having your rigger pack your reserve with more material at the bottom can help keep the dividing wall rigid, and even push the AAD into the space normally reserved for your main, again helping to keep an undersized main in check (do not do this on Javelin/Wings/any other pop top - on rigs with enclosed reserve pilot cutes this will only make the rig less comfortable, on pop tops it is a safety concern as it creates a gap between the top of the reserve pilot chute and your container). As Binary said, logos and Dacron lines help push the pack volume up, but if you are willing to make that level of investment (relines (most canopies don't come with Dacron default), and especially custom canopies with logos are expensive), you are better off finding a used rig in the size that you need for your intended canopy to be a proper fit and selling your current one. If the smallest size your rig can hold is a 150 ZP, it can hold a 170 and probably a 190, which makes it a popular size for first rig, which makes selling it easier. I would advise against adding any sort of padding to your container/dbag to help with the pack volume. Doing the padding properly is not easy, and your rigger will probably charge you a lot for it, doing it the quick and dirty way might interfere with your openings, and both will significantly lower the resale value of your rig. I know that your question was largely hypothetical, but my $0.02 is that some additional information can't hurt.
  10. I am talking about getting from a student canopy to a properly loaded sport canopy to learn some slightly more advanced aspects of canopy control. There are basic things you can and should learn on your Navigator 240 (like making a proper landing pattern, making a flat turn, accurately landing in a designated place, avoiding traffic, and timing your flare), but once you are at 50ish jumps, a good number of people who were interested enough to learn those things will have learned them. Those that are not interested to learn them will not learn them in 300+ jumps. But things like front and rear riser flight, as well as harness input are almost impossible to learn on such canopies at such wingloadings as the forces required to use the risers are insanely high, and harness response is non-existent. Please note that I am not talking about high performance landings here, just knowing how to pilot your canopy the way you want it to go.. And the idea that would totally eliminate the danger is to ban skydiving all together, as no one can get hurt landing a parachute if no one is jumping out of airplanes, but eliminating the danger is not the point of this sport. What I am proposing is to help those who are interested in and capable of learning to learn as quickly as possible, and as in any sport, there are certain risks if you want to progress faster, which some people are willing to accept.
  11. And we agree here, as I would not encourage anyone to do downplanes or make stacks with anything but a dedicated CReW canopy. (which doesn't have to be a 7 cell, nor does it have to be lightly loaded, have you seen the PD Tango?) But downplanes and canopy docks are exercises which are applicable only to people doing CReW, and I don't want to force anyone to get into full contact canopy relative any more than you want to force people to go into swooping. Contactless canopy proximity flying on the other hand is an exercise that makes you a much better canopy pilot, regardless of the discipline you choose to pursue afterwards. When you have another canopy in the air next to you, you can see exactly what happens when you initiate any sort of toggle, riser, or harness input, because you will have a frame of reference (which you normally only have during landing, when the ground is getting closer), and you will learn how to control your canopy horizontal and vertical speed, as you will need to match them to another person (and this can't be done properly on very lightly loaded wings, as both the front and the rear risers are way to heavy to be useful, and harness is almost unresponsive). Glide ratio is a constructive characteristic of the airfoil, and is independent of wing loading. A 9 cell will typically have a better glide ratio than a 7 cell, purely because the aspect ratio of the wing is greater, and aspect ratio positively affects wing efficiency (that is why gliders have very big wing spans in relation to their chord, and consequently very high aspect ratios). When we say glide ratio, we are referring solely on airspeed. When it comes to penetrating wind, it is not only the glide ratio you need, but horizontal speed, as ground speed (difference between you airspeed and the speed of the wind) is what you need to get over that powerline/highway/barn. When wind gets sufficiently strong, you will be standing still with anything loaded at 1.0, but something at 1.4 might get you moving forward. And before someone responds with "you shouldn't be jumping if winds are too strong", wind can change during jump, and people are eager to jump so in the real world wind limits will routinely be pushed.
  12. It is neither necessary, nor inevitable, but it will statistically happen to a vast number of people. I have read your post in the Perris fatality thread about pilot progression and encouraging learning other (than high performance landings) aspects of canopy flight (like canopy formations, practical accuracy, and similar), and while I agree with you that those are valuable skills, it is not really necessary to teach those at 7 cells loaded below 1.0. Slightly higher wing loadings give you increased ability to penetrate wind and higher stability in turbulence, while 9 cells give you a better glide and better flare over 7 cells. A Safire, Sabre, Volt, Pilot, or a similar semi elliptical canopy loaded at 1.4-ish gives you ample opportunity to learn majority of aspects of canopy flight, will tolerate all but the stupidest of mistakes, and still enable you to get back from that bad downwind spot. Adding on, a 170ish canopy with vectran lines has a sufficiently small pack volume for you to have a normal sized rig that will not kill your back while you are waiting to board the plane, and will help prevent snagging your pins on objects in the airplane (which also requires training and attention on the side of the skydiver, but is also much easier to do with something holding a Safire 169 than a Navigator 240). I have not seen people being forced to downsize everywhere, and while I have seen some instructors push people to downsize more and more, those were rather rare instances. The reality is that a lot of (especially younger) people perceive high performance landings as fun. While those carry certain risk, a lot of people are willing to accept them as after all, if our primary concern was safety over fun, we would be playing chess every weekend instead of jumping out of somewhat serviceable airplanes.
  13. Without knowing the skill of the person in question, and altitude/climate of the local dropzone, it seems excessive, but I can see the circumstances under which those would be considered acceptable. A lot of people don't have the money to change gear very often, so the idea was probably to get the guy a container that will be useful for a couple of future downsizes, providing he doesn't get hurt for the first 20-30 jumps while he is getting used to the canopy. If the local dropzone has rather constant winds, low altitude, and a C182 which limits the number of simultaneous people in the air to 4, it might not be the smartest idea in the world, but it isn't a catastrophic one. I would also recommend a Safire over a Sabre as it has a shorter recovery arch. While in the ideal world of the average person advocating safety on this website (conservative people with infinite money, strong safety culture, and highly regulated skydiving) this situation would be frowned upon and this person would be prevented from jumping that gear, we are living in the real world, and things often need to be optimized using more than one parameter (the likelihood of the jumper getting hurt). I have seen it very often that the first canopy a person buys at under 100 jumps is a 170 by default, regardless of a wing loading (and sometimes even a 150 with a very light person).
  14. I didn't specifically see a 308 with a full fitting main and reserve at the same time, but I have seen a V309 and a V310 with full fitting things in top and bottom, and I have seen an ancient V34X (can't really remember exact number) which was overstuffed beyond factory full fit in both top and bottom, but somehow managed to handle it as it was old/stretched. Basically, all of those were safe, but the look of the container was not really good. I would still recommend that over getting a smaller reserve than you are comfortable having, especially because with your KA being a KA you might be needing that reserve a wee bit more than if you were flying say a Crossfire.