Cessnadog

In the PD packing video they show a single fold on each side to the center. center cell left hanging. My belief is that this distributes the material a little better and avoids the problems associated with "pushing" the nose into the pack job. Also, with both sides treated the same, on heading openings should be more likely.

I WONT be the girl showing her tits this year. Im gonna be a good girl this year. Im keeping my clothes on That's it, I'm not coming now.

Hey, we are just up the road from Albert Lea! I will be at Couch, see you then.

So, Minnesota Skydivers is bringing in a Skyvan for our boogie August 16, 17, and 18. I would love to set up a DZ.Com record attempt if I can find enough people to do so. Any takers? Boogie info at; www.mnskydive.com

Scott, I understood, My canopy is set up with the toggles at the marks, my tail is not deflected at all and in fact I think I could set the toggles 2 or 3 inches up before the tail would be deflected. I just find it interesting that there be 4 or so inches difference between our canopies.

WOW, I noticed that on my Sabre2 170 there is a couple of inches of slack (in flight) that could be taken up before the tail was deflected. I did not move them as I was getting plenty of flair the way it was set.

I have a question... Seems that Sabre 2 owners fall into 2 groups.... Normal on heading and odd/ turning openings.... Can we find a correlation between manufacture date and good/bad openings? My canopy was built in December 2001 and open a bit on the funky side. I would love to hear from both sides on this. thanks

This thread is very interesting to me. Had my first malfunction last weekend (1200 jumps). Had to cut away a Sabre 2 170 that was spinning on opening. Canopy looked fine except for the line twist…. Yes, I had pushed the nose back into the canopy while packing.

Bill, I hope to run into you someday so I can buy you a beer. Let them call you a canopy nazi. I have lost too many friends to bad judgment and small canopies.

I am going to head off topic a bit here, sorry I agree that dissing the Nova saved lives. How many people were killed under them? More would have been had they continued making them. This canopy was a problem if not made perfectly. I will go a step further and say that for many jumpers it could be a problem if it was perfect. For the right jumper it was a great canopy if you got a good one. How many people have died under todays current elliptical canopies? Problem?

Bill, I agree with 99% of what you have been saying. I do want to chime in on your statement on the novas though. I don’t think you can make the blanket statement that you did. I had about 300 jumps on 4 different novas. I really do believe that they had issues similar to the Crossfires. I don’t think that Glidepath realized exactly how tight the manufacturing tolerances were. My last Nova (after Glidepath built me a new one, my first one was awful even though it “measured” fine) flew fine even in turbulence. Tim

900 jumps 6 posts (this makes 7) 150 (129)

Years ago a friend had a canopy that he always call a “fusion”. It supposedly had been a test canopy for a manufacturer that never got to market. I recall it flying ok once it opened, but might well take 1500 feet to do that. Does anybody know anything else about this canopy? Just thought of it since there is another Fusion out there now…

Mike Fury did indeed start GlidePath. Prior to that he make canopies under the name Django. Django made the Pegasus which was a 7 cell and had an amazing ability to fly backwards. (really). The Raider, as a nine cell was/is a different canopy. I made a few jumps on one back when that was about as high as canopy performance got. Nice, fun to fly and easy to land. Not much different than a PD-210

Hate to rub it in but my rigger called and he got my new Mirage yesterday! Exactly 4 weeks.