• Content

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback


Posts posted by mmm_peanuts

  1. Not to hijack this thread, but I had to stop using my paraconcepts rings for the same reason. Brand new lines turned disgusting on my vx after 150 jumps. The rings had developed distinct grooves in the high wear areas that are both visible and detectable by touch. Very soft metal that is just wearing away on the lines. These might just be defective and likely do not reflect everyones experiences with them.

  2. Here is a video of two openings which shows exactly what is going on. I do a standard pro pack with the slider positioned just like a comp velocity with snaps (mine has no snaps).

    Yes this line set was made by nzaerosports, and they have agreed to help me get an HMA lineset to replace this one.

  3. I was going to try a larger size if they offer it. Cant afford relining that frequently. If that sounds like it will create more problems, then I may be forced to change canopies...

    Sounds like the may be size specific, since they cant test all sizes and configurations. I wonder if a slightly different size would eliminate or reduce this.

  4. Thats what I thought. Is anyone seeing this on other hp canopies, or is this specifically jvx? I love this canopy, and would hate to change due to increased malfunction rate; my only cutaway was a tension knot after an ideal snivel on this canopy. I also only noticed this after reviewing videos, and have never seen it during jumps.

  5. Here is a sample of of 6 openings. Despite what the lines are doing, all of these opened beautifully soft and on heading.

    I apologize for the lack of quality of these photos. Just switched to mac, and imovie is refusing to work with anything that touched sony vegas. Screenshots are the best that I could get. Btw I am a very neat packer, and initial snivels show no slack lines on any of these openings.

  6. I too have a zp jvx90 with vectran lines and am experiencing the same loose lines during opening; Specifically it is most drastic just before the slider starts to move down. My lines have around 150 jumps, and I have videos showing this on essentially every opening. When these lines decide to not knot up (happend twice in 150 jumps), the openings are simply amazing; non seaking snivel with center cell inflation spreading out to the endcells, easily staying on heading. This canopy is DOM feb. 2006.

    I can post videos with frames showing rogue loose lines forming randomly during inflation upon request.

  7. +1 You can't trust just anyone, even instructors. I know 2-3 AFF instructors and even examiners who have made radical canopy decisions/ progressions, leading to near death injuries through piss-poor piloting. When it comes to canopy flight, know who your talking to. Responsible instructors will make reasonable recommendations, but not all. Best reference is professional canopy pilots/course directors, who are able to give you direct feedback on observed jumps.

    If you are ever questioning you canopy selection, the answer is that you are simply not ready for it.

  8. I definitely agree that this is NOT a recommended way to control canopy flight characteristics, but it is something that can effect people in equipment changes. This, I am assuming, is most noticable at high wing loadings. I experienced a noticeable difference in flight switching between C-16 and C-18 harnesses, with ideal C-17 @ 2.0. This is a reasonable fitting on both systems, which is something that may be experienced by people using used equipment.

  9. Please keep on topic. This harness phenominom has to do with a pendulum effect created by an increased distance between the pilots harness pivot point or load point, and the canopy. This has been brought to attention due to riser length, but not harness length. Any input on the TOTAL distance from the canopy to the load, since I feel the effect of the harness variable has yet to be addressed in canopy flight.

  10. Chest strap would most certainly make a difference if not let fully out after deployment. However, both of the systems that I was using had fully extended, over sized chest straps. This placed the risers and harness in line with each other, placing the pivot point at the hip rings.

    My thought is that, in circumstances such as this, placing the load further from the canopy (either by riser length or harness length), will create effects such as increased recovery arc.

  11. I recently had the opportunity to try the same canopy/riser combination on 2 different containers; One had a slightly short harness for myself, while the other had a slightly long harness. I found that the canopy performed differently on each system, comparable to changing riser length on the same container. I have yet to fly a container designed for my frame.

    I feel that this effect has yet to be addressed here and I would like more input on the subject, since many purchase used equipment that, "fits close enough".

    Further more, do people with longer frames on a properly sized harness experience flight characteristics similar to shorter individuals with longer risers on the same canopy and wing loading? (ie. the distance from the canopy to the hip rings is the same)

  12. A friend and I are interested in building RDS systems for our canopies, and were wondering which dimensions should be used. Should we keep the grommet placement of the stock sliders (slightly smaller slider dimensionally), or use the stock slider size with the grommets slightly more spread out? We have para-concepts style rings. If anyone has the dimensions of RDS sliders for these canopies please let us know.