isaiah85

Nice job buddy! way to throw down!

Jimmy Coiner once ate a whole cake before his friends could tell him there was a stripper in it

This depends on what you're looking for in a canopy. Both canopies are a good choice depending on what you're after. Only you’re going to know what you like. When helping someone choose a canopy, some of the questions I ask are; what kind of skydiving do you do? (Big ways, freefly, 4 way, wing suit, ect...). What is most important about your canopy (opening, landing, how it feels up high)? If you had to pick one thing you could have great openings and so, so landings or so, so openings and great landings, what would you choose? There are certain characteristics people look for in a canopy, not to generalize here, these are two extremes. Some people are all about freefall and hate the canopy ride, the canopy is only there so they can go back up and freefall again. "Generally", this type of person looks for a canopy with hassle free openings, they like them quick but not hard. They also want a canopy that glides well from a long spot with out a lot of work. Because they could do without the canopy ride, they haven't worked too much on landing the canopy, so they want something easy to land and forgiving of mistakes. On the other extreme you have people who are all about the canopy ride, freefall is just wasted canopy time. These people aren’t as picky about the opening, if they are on a long spot they’ll use their “superior” skills to make it home, they want the canopy to dive hard, build up a lot of speed and swoop far, that’s what skydiving is all about for these people. Most people fall somewhere in the middle, but if you lean towards the “I’m only about freefall the Pilot, Silhouette, Stiletto (depending on experiance) might be good choice. If you lean towards the “I’m all about the canopy ride” the Safire2, Sabre2 would be a better choice. Not that everyone who is all about freefall wouldn’t like the more “ground hungry” swooping style canopies, or the other way around, but this is not very common. I am a little bias, but I’d rather have you jumping another manufactures product and be happy, then jumping one of ours and hate it. I hope you find what you’re looking for and I hope you’re happy with whatever you decide on, but for sure demo some canopies so you can find what you like best. Isaiah

Good, thats the way it should be. It's silly to have more then one distance record.

Jay's run at Mile Hi is an official record, it's under the "performance record" category. In order for it to be a "competition" record it needs to be at a FAI calendar event, ie; nationals, world cup, world meet. Jay's 494 is the current record, in my opinion it's silly to file for a record that isn't longer, even if in some category it could be considered a record. The current "competition record" is listed as Jonathan's run at the world cup at Lake Wales in 05' without weight restrictions, I don't know how much weight he was wearing, but the weight rule wasn't in effect then.

22680, level 9 second time around I spent a lot of time traveling in 07'...

There seems to be quite a lot of questions going on in this thread. I’m going to do my best to answer 2 of them, the one regarding the PD-218, whether or not it should be safe to jump at a 1-1 WL. The other is more wing loading in general. When the original PD canopies hit the market, the average canopy sizes were much larger then today, I guess for a few reasons, they didn't land as well and just a guess here, but I would bet canopy piloting skills weren't as good. Just from my experiences over the last 8 years, people now with 50 jumps generally have more knowledge about flying parachutes then someone with far more jumps even 8 years ago. From what I understand, a 1-1 WL at most DZ’s before the original “PD” line of canopies came out was considered pretty radical, most people didn't load that high. When PD developed the “PD” line of canopies, compared to most other canopies on the market, it had great flare power and was possible to get “reasonable” landings at a higher WL. So, the natural reaction was to get a smaller canopy, why not, the smaller PD would be more fun to fly and would still provide a good landing. Keep in mind the frame of reference these guys were coming from, compared to today’s canopies they don’t have a powerful flare and most people wouldn't say they are “sporty” in the air. The recommended WL’s on the canopy’s are based what the people who developed the canopy thought at that skill level you could get “acceptable” landings, taking into consideration the mistakes people make at the different skill levels, of course there is no way to determine who is a novice and who is an expert, not too mention aerodynamics don’t scale evenly, so it’s a close but rough estimate. Then came the next generation of canopies, the Sabre’s and what not. The same thing happened again, these newer style canopies landed better, so people jumped smaller canopies at even higher WL’s, they were more fun to fly and still provided good landings, so why not. What happened was the general idea of WL and what’s reasonable slowly became higher. Before the “PD” line a 0.7 WL was perfectly reasonable for a novice or expert, now with the latest generation of canopies and the increased knowledge of canopy flight people with far less jumps and experience could now jump a canopy at 1-1 or even a 1.3 WL and still be considered safe. So in short, over time the accepted WL’s people fly canopies at and what is considered “radical” has gone up quite a bit over the years. What changed are the canopies as well as the skill level. So, looking at an older style canopy like the “PD” line and what we now consider “reasonable” WL’s, you can’t jump these canopies at the definition of a 2007 “reasonable” WL and get “reasonable” landing, because the 2007 definition of a reasonable WL is much higher then what the design of the canopy was intended for. Just a quick analogy, Picture a highway with a posted speed limit of 75 mph, in any reasonably new car it’s a safe speed to travel, now put yourself in a Ford model T, that car was never designed to go that fast, it would be ridiculous and dangerous to drive that fast in that design. But, using the car in it’s originally designed parameters would be totally reasonable, same thing goes for the older style canopies, they aren't unsafe to jump, just not a good idea to use them at today’s "reasonable" WL’s. Another thing that came up was a bigger jumper jumping say 260 sq ft canopies at a 1.2 WL at 40 jumps… One thing to understand is, WL will effect the speed the canopy flies at, the size of the canopy determines more the responsiveness, because aerodynamics don’t scale evenly, a jumper loading a 260 sq ft at 1.3 is going to be far less responsive then a jumper loading a 120 at a 0.8 WL. For bigger people, they tend to look for more responsiveness in a canopy, because jumping at a reasonable WL, puts them under something so big that it doesn't feel responsive enough, but when they downsize enough to get somewhat of a sporty feel, now they have a high WL and come screaming in. Just the opposite happens with small jumpers, in order to get any kind of WL so they have some penetration into the wind, they downsize to some silly small canopy, then it’s so responsive if they flare slightly uneven they go crashing to one side or the other. What tends to happen a lot is you see a small jumper asking a big guy about canopy advice, from the big guys frame of reference a 1.3 WL is completely reasonable and says that’s what you should fly, not taking into consideration what size canopy that puts the smaller person under, or you might have the flip situation a small jumper telling a big guy with 40 jumps 1.2 WL is way too high, even though at 1.2-1 he might be under a 280. Every single person is coming from a different frame of reference; there is no perfect or safe WL for everyone. WL is simply one thing to possibly consider when choosing a canopy. More importantly is how well it works for the person flying the canopy. If a small girl is jumping a 107 sq ft canopy at a 0.9 WL and duffs in every time, maybe it’s not the right canopy, regardless of wing loading, if you can’t land the canopy well, chances are pretty good it’s not the right one. Then you factor in all the different canopy designs and it gets even more complex. The best advice anyone can get in the beginning is, play it safe, try the bigger canopies, try a few of them, see what one works best for you, nobody knows what is right for you, asking someone to recommend a canopy to you, or say what canopy is going to work best for you is like asking, what color do I like. I hope some of this helps, be safe and have FUN!

This subject comes up quite a bit, I asked John Leblanc about it, here is his reply. "We introduced the Stiletto in three sizes in July of 1992. Since then, the following changes have been made: In 1994 we made a change to the canopy logo panels to make them easier to produce. In March 1999, we added spanwise reinforcing tapes on the 120 and 135 sizes. These tapes were already on the larger sizes for extra durability, and we just added them on two smaller sizes. In June of 1999 we created the new style warning labels that have the skill levels with varying wing loading maximums for each category, with a far higher maximum wing loadings than the original 1.3 lbs/sq.ft. As you can see, the changes made don't affect the performance. The airfoil and trim changes that people believe occurred on the Stiletto have never occurred, and there have been no changes made in any way to "detune" the canopy. People's perceptions have changed over time, because our sport has changed so much. As the designer of the Stiletto, I can emphatically state that we are still using the same line lengths and cutting the exact original part shapes with our laser cutting machinery that we used in 1992 for the first Stiletto."

That's the size, its a 111. P01 is lineset stuff.

I'm not exactly sure what sizes or revisions the PDFT members are all jumping, but I'm pretty sure they are all jumping the revision that is going to be sold, like Ian said some sizes are different revisions though, so they might not all be "44". Scaling canopy sizes doesn't always have the desired result. Dave, I put you on the waiting list for the 75, you're first in line! That should put you at a sporty WL, always looking out for you buddy!

The numbers refer to revisions or "rev". The canopy coming out will be like a Velocity on steroids, different canopy all together not just trims. It's going to be a competition canopy, competition canopy = high maintenance (300 HMA, RDS...), for people who don't want to deal with the maintenance, there is always the "regular" Velocity. From everything I understand, the canopy is ready, there is a few people flying them now, just some other things to sort out, like production stuff. Should be soon. Isaiah

Your best bet is to contact the container manufacturer for sizing. Sorry I can't give you more info then that... Isaiah

Yea, we had a 143 packed in a 106 bag it was tighter then the 106 though. From what we found, a rig with whatever current reserve in it, if it packs up real tight, you can go one size bigger, if it's medium you can sometimes go two sizes larger. The PIA measuring method has them coming in about 15% smaller in pack volume, but actually packing them it's closer to 30% smaller. The best part about these canopies is the way they perform though, we have the demo's available now so check them out. Isaiah

Call your dealer and find out what needs to be done. I wouldn't think there should be any problem changing your reserve order, unless you ordered some crazy custom colors. Chances are the canopies you ordered just came from stock. Isaiah

Exactly! Comparing the Sabre2 and the Pilot isn't fair to either one of them. They both have extremely different characteristics. The Silhouette is the canopy that should be compared to the Pilot. The Sabre2 is just a more aggressive style canopy. If you’re looking to compare a canopy with the Sabre2 the Safire is in that range. Best thing to do is try different canopies and see what works best for you, not what works best for someone else. Isaiah