alan

Takes about 15 minutes to build a set with either the soft tab or mini ring, if you have the materials on hand. Lay out and mark the micro line (725# works fine) for cutting and finger trapping all five at the same time, same goes for the webbing for the soft tabs if you are making that type. Cut the lines and webbing. Finger trap and bar tack or zig zag with a back stitch or over stitch to lock the thread. Fold and sew the tabs through the loops on one end. The soft tab type will use a total of about $4.00 worth of materials at Para Gear prices.

I always have a 15 minute break in a reserve repack to let air settle out of the canopy during the closing portion. It is a good set of rigging skills to stay current on, very similar to re-lining. But then, I'm not a full-time rigger so I guess the guys in a loft have no problem staying current on all of the skills.

Have your rigger contact the manufacturer for the specs and he or she can do the job for $10 or $15. May be a little more as many riggers prefer to replace both lines of a pair because of shrinkage issues.

My experince with PD would lead me to believe your problem will be fixed in about two weeks. They'll inspect and jump your canopy to find the cause of the problem. If they can duplicate the problem, they will try to fix it in less than two weeks. If it takes longer, they will send you a demo to use. If they cannot find the cause and repair it, they will give you an option on a new canopy. That may take several more weeks, but you will have the use of the demo until it arrives.

I questioned Sandy Reid of RI about this several years ago. They cost more. They will far outlast the gutted 550 Type II if used properly. They will be dangerous if not used properly. Basically the packer has to put a finger over the loop when removing the pullup chord and should not feel any heat from friction when the pullup chord is removed. If heat is felt, there may be hidden damage to the Spectra between the pin and the loop, even when care is taken to pull it under the pin.

I have one made of 800# Spectra that has 500 or more jumps on it. I'm careful with the pullup chord and I treat it with a little silicone every now and then. I keep the loop pretty tight and have had no pin slipping issues. The old reserve loops before the CYPRES loops became the norm were just Spectra and the same loops will work just fine on the main...........just don't burn them with a careless zip of the pullup chord.

Aside from the debate about breaking and not breaking...baglock, etc., if you want to use tube stowes or bands is a personal decision. Some may choose to use both on the same D-bag and I would advise caution (read as don't do it) if you do choose to do this. The idea is to have even tension on each line bite as they release to help prevent or minimize line twists. This is the same as not putting a large band on one side for a bite of lines and a small one across from it. The stowe bands just help the lines pay out in a neat and orderly fashion until linestetch. At line stretch, and only at line stretch, should the locking stowes release, allowing the canopy to come out of the D-bag.

Personally, I just use the small (1" or 1 1/4") mil spec rubber bands all the way around and I treat them periodocally with silicone like that used on a CYPRES loop. It extends the life of the band to that of tube stowes or longer and the lines pay out nicely. If the canopy is a tight fit in the bag, I use the lager bands on the locking stowes because I may need to stretch them more to get them through the grommets.

Quote

Steep Angle of attack

Are you sure it is AOA that is "steep", since the AOA is defined as the angle formed beteween the freestream velocity vector (relative wind) and the chord line.

Quote

and the glide was noticably steeper,

I think this means you were referring to the flight path angle above instead of the AOA. I see this mistake pretty often in the forums. Up to a point, a steeper (higher) AOA will result in a flatter glide (flight path) angle and slower speed. The AOA in static conditions is determined by the angle of incidence or trim angle. Think of how pulling on your front and rear risers affects the flight of the canopy. Pulling on the risers has the effect of changing the trim angle and AOA. Rear risers increase the angle of attack. How does that affect the canopy flight? Front risers decrease the AOA. How do they affect the flight of the canopy?

Quote

Putting tighter line stows isn't going to prevent slammer openings.

Yes, I agree. I think that many jumpers don't have a basic understanding of the opening sequence and the forces involved. I'm not an expert and don't have a degree in Physics but reading Poynter helps. Snatch force occors first and stands the jumper up. The snivel phase occurs after the canopy leaves the D-bag and just before opening shock which comes at full inflation. In my opinion, so much emphasis has been placed on soft openings, that manufacturers have unnecessarily made the snivel phase excessively long on the newer canopy designs becuase so many jumpers associate a long snivel with a soft opening.

Quote

a rigger friend of mine had pull-test done on it and the weak spot was in the same place as a regular finger-trap, where the fingertrap ends and goes back to single line... the 'knot' is NOT the weak link.

You and your rigger friend are quite correct on this. Sandy Reid of Rigging Innovations published an article or two in Skydiving Magazine a few years back that discussed the proper fingertrapping of various line types and where lines tend to break.

We have all read the discussions on Vectran, HMA, you name it lines, that have looked new or even been new and have broken. Then someone goes on to bash that type of line. Well, maybe the line is not as good as the other type, but we can't always just assume that. A new Spectra line that has not been cut and finger trapped properly can and will break unexpectedly just as HMA or any other line. Hot knife Spectra and cut it square instead of at a bias and you are asking for the line to break at the end of the finger trap. So, when people are talking about type X line breaking unexpectedly and not being as good or as safe as type Y, I tend to ignore it unless they provide some real information, like where did it break.

Quote

In response to your last statement. Did the dacron, spectra and the old kevlar look brand new too?

The dacron looked a little used but not as if it should have failed. Several new looking spectra lines. By that, I mean that I know they had less than 100 jumps on them.

The old kevlar fell out of use for a reason. It was prone to breaking. It didn't take many jumps on it before it got a used look, kinda like Vectran, but they weren't old enough to be obviously worn out. I even had to replace a pc kill-line that was made of kevlar that had broken.

In most of the cases it seemed to me as if an odd occurance of uneven loading was probably the main culprit. Like one line that the loop had worked its' way over the barrel on a french link and hung up there while the others remained up on the bend.

Quote

what about the incidents where the canopy colapses on a straight in approach with no radical turns or speed. If we are moving slower in an approach would the parachute be more responsive to a side wind, or a gust that could collapse the parachute?

I don't wish to be insensitive, but at the same time this may be a good opportunity to learn something. Perhaps if you and others had taken the time to learn the answer to this question before deciding to jump an extremely high performance canopy at a wing loading of over 2#/sq ft, we wouldn't have some of the incidents that we do. Learn some basic principals/fundamentals of flight before attempting to become an aggresive pilot who consistently does 270's under a Xaos27 78ft. This basic knowledge could be the difference between injury/death and a good decision that keeps you out of trouble.

I am sorry about your teammate. In answer to your question, yes, any wing that is flying closer to its' stall speed on a landing approach will be more susceptable to gusts, crosswinds, and turbulence.

Think of landing a 182. If the above conditions exist, the operators manual requires that you make increases to the airspeed on final approach so you don't suddenly find the aircraft below stall speed. That is fine because the 182 has an engine to generate thrust. Now suppose you are forced to do a deadstick landing as a result of failure of the engine. You are now more like a parachute since you can't use the throttle to help make adjustments to airspeed and altitude. You still have to maintain enough airspeed to land and the airplane is fully capable of that, but with a crosswind or in gusty conditions you need to exercise extra care to keep adequate speed with precise pitch control.

With the Xaos 27 at over 2#/sq ft, you should be able to land straight in, but if it is gusty or turbulant, you need to conserve your speed as much as possible by timing the flare properly. If you get into brakes to much, too soon, a gust that normally would not present a problem may collapse the canopy. Perhaps the pilot was using rear risers, this only makes it trickier as now you are changing the trim angle of the canopy and very minor inputs can result in a dynamic stall.

One thing we can all remember, is that sometimes we find ourselves in situations that exceed the performance capabilites/limitations of the aircraft we are flying. Nothing can fix that. It is like driving down a street at the posted limit of 25 mph and suddenly a child runs out from behind a parked car. The timing may be such that no matter how good a driver you are and how good your reflexes are, the car is simply not capable of stopping in the distance available.

Quote

HMA can have a couple hundres jumps on it, look like brand new, and snap. This has been shown repeatedly in labratory line-wear tests

There must be a link to this somewhere, if there is, could you post it? Maybe just provide what labs did the testing and we can look it up for ourselves.

Quote

and i've heard of incident such as this in the field.

Yes, many of us have heard about this and even a few have seen it first hand. I've seen dacron, spectra and the old kevlar do it as well.

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1090298;search_string=ash%20dive%20bag;#1090298

Try this thread. Or, copy a 5 lb. flour bag only sew on a continuous loop of webbing on the bottom side for handles on both ends and leave the seam on the top to be closed with velcro with a handle on it.

Excellent comments. I'm sure at least one person will read our exchange and understand what has been said. That makes it worthwhile. Happy trails to you.

Quote

There is a difference between being able to handle a smaller canopy* vs continually jumping it. Besides, I won't actually switch to the PD113R for another couple of weeks, so as of today, I'm still following my own advice. ;-)

Hehe! I'm glad you caught the humor/irony in what I was trying to say. I have no doubt of your abilities. The difference between "being able to handle a smaller canopy vs continually jumping it" is one of luck. Being able to handle it means you will eventually get hurt if you continually jump it unless your luck holds out long enough for you to become proficient and know how to fly it.

Quote

In the hope that perhaps a positive example is worthwhile,

Loading a reserve at 1.68 is positive example? Hehe, well at least it is a PD reserve, that must be the positive example!

Quote

the PD113R is bigger than 113sqft

And it is measured the same way as the Stiletto 120, so it would follow that the 120 is bigger than 120 as well, so other than stating the obvious, which as a rigger I am well aware of, do you have a point?

Quote

I was told by someone that makes canopies for a living that you can land any canopy that is currently on the market straight in. I was told that anyone that claims "I need to hook it to land it" is a poor pilot and probably needs to upsize.

If my memory is correct, the "someone" you are referring to could be John LeBlanc from Performance Designs. A proficient pilot can execute a swoop properly from a straight in approach, it just won't be as long as when executed following a speed building manuever.

Quote

I have a X-fire2 at almost 1.8 and it SUCKS to land straight in or level out too high. Hurts feet, knees etc

If you have trouble landing it straight in, you shouldn't be flying it. When flown properly, that canopy at the stated wingloading should not hurt your feet or knees when landing. I may be missing something here, but it seems to me that you are excactly the type of pilot ManBird and Tree were referring to. I'm not trying to flame you or piss you off, I'm just being blunt and candid.

Quote

In the hope that perhaps a positive example is worthwhile, I'll outline my choices. I have over 2000 jumps, and fly a Stiletto 120 loaded 1.6. I have about 1000 jumps on this canopy size, flying in almost every condition except high-altitude DZs (e.g. Denver), including the 672-way in Bangkok (congested, tiny, no outs), numerous 100+ big ways, and 4-ways in most meteorological conditions, and can safely fly the canopy to where I want to land.

I am not getting all the performance from my canopy that it is capable of, and I believe I lack to the experience to downsize. I have set myself a restriction that I will not downsize again until I at least take a canopy control course,

From your profile:
Main Canopy: Stiletto 120 ft² (1.58 lbs/ft²)
Reserve Canopy: PD Reserve 113 ft² (1.68lbs/ft²)

It would seem that your self imposed restriction on downsizing may be altered shortly following a malfunction as opposed to taking a canopy control course.

Also look into the nose openings on each cell and check the ribs for tears between the crossports.

Your profile says you are still a Student. Is your S&TA OK with a student jumping without an AAD? Just wondering because the last time I checked, the BSRs said an AAD was required on all student jumps. I would advise you to get some input from your DZO/S&TA on this one.

I define recovery arc very much like you, although some canopies, maybe even most, won't return to level flight with no input and then there are those that recover to level flight by how you finish the dive. For example, near the end of a relatively steep dive as the front riser pressure is high, you can ease up on them relatively quickly and the canopy wants to plane out with no further input.

One way to sustain a dive, and in a manner of speaking, extending the recovery arc, is to use the harness to give the opposite input as the front riser you are using. It may not be the most efficient method but it may be a better alternative to planing out too high.

Quote

Now I ask you all how can we devise this thread to commend the students in the most positive way possible without the feeling of being less of an achiever?

How many of our students will actually come here (Instructors Forum) and read what is said? Might I suggest that the internet is only a means of sharing information, good or bad, and that if we want to commend our students, we do do it in person after the dive. It has worked for me for the last ten or so years. After every dive, with every student, I emphasize the positve aspects of the dive and what they have learned. Later in the debrief we talke about what could have been done better and how. If anything went wrong, we also discuss that and what could have been done to prevent it. I try to relate almost everything to safety, both the students and those around them.

Some listen and learn. Some don't.

Quote

to compensate for the fact that it reportedly dives like a dog...

I jumped both canopies and another jumper experienced on a 96 FX @ about 2.0#/ft2 jumped the larger canopy. Neither of us or anyone watching us at the DZ felt that either canopy dove like a dog. Both had very nice dives with light riser pressure and a shorter recovery arc when the brakes were
"bumped". The canopies were very responsive to harness input.

As far as Atair marketing, I don't know. I do know I was treated very well and fairly, most especially by Jean. Somewhere, someone made a mistake with these canopies. That is obvious. Everyone makes mistakes, including Atair.

I can understand you keeping your Velocity. I am keeping my X-VX as well. I appreciated the opportunity to jump the Onyx's and was very impressed by the quality of construction and performance. They will not satisfy everyones personal preferences. I have a feeling that a lot of people are really going to love them though and am inclined to give the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the labelling error.

Quote

yea, i was supposed to get a 85 and a 95. well i got 2 canopies, and they are 2 different sizes. but one says 85 (the bigger one) and the other has a 75 crossed out and then 85 wrote next to it. so i'm not too sure what the hell i have. but i'm jumping them tomorrow (tonight if i get some weather).

Yes, I sent them. The 85 is supposed to really be a 95. I was told by Jean at Atair that several canopies had been mislabelled at the factory and the 95 had been sent to me before the placard had been corrected to refelect this. I talked to Dan about it because when layed out flat on the hangar floor on top of my 89 X-VX, the 95 appeared to be smaller by about 5 or 6 sq ft based on how much of the 89 was exposed. Dan said that was due to the 95 being the "projected size". I included a note in the bag about the placarding error when I shipped it to you.

Jean sent me the 85 that had the placard corrected as you mention. I thought the performance was more in the 75 size range for someone with my exit weight (about 215) based on some jumps I have made on a 72 XOAS-27.

Maybe the 89 is actually closer to 95 based on a different measuring system. My 89 is the smallest canopy currently on the DZ so we did not have anything in the 70's to lay out for comparison with the 75/85. Wanna have some fun? Load the smaller canopy at about 215# (actually , you're already about 225#) out the door and try landing it with the rear risers and no toggles at all. It did not go well for me.

Quote

3. Smile a lot. If you're smiling, things must be going OK (thinks the student.) Along with that, don't wear a full face helmet. People look like scary insects when they wear full face helmets.

I find this most effective. Not only do I smile but I also remind the student to smile. Trust the arch and let the relative wind do the work. Very few people can truly smile and be tense at the same time. If you have a big, shit eatin' grin on your face, not one of those forced smiles, odds are you are relaxed. I had a student a few years back that heard me say smile so often, he had "Yes Al, I'm Smiling" painted on the top of his Pro Tec.

Items 1,2, and 4 seem to follow the smile theory and taken as a whole, work really well. I put it at the top of the list. It has only worked for me about 5000 times, so it is still just a theory in the testing stage.