pchapman

The coldest I've jumped in was -20 C (-4 F), 2 weekends ago, where the air temp was actually fairly constant at all altitudes up to the 10500' exit. Ground temps were around -15C to -20C (5F to -4F). On that jump, with a partner and I doing sit or head down, we both got frostbitten skin on our noses. The skin went quite white so it was easy to see after landing. The skin warmed quickly in the heated packing trailer; during the following week some minor skin peeling occurred. Technically it can be called frost nip because only the skin apparently froze, not the underlying tissue. Fingers were quite cold but acceptable on that jump. So a constant -20C is just beyond my desired limit without a full face helmet or a neoprene face mask. I've had other jumps where the temperature at exit was -15 to -20C, but never had a frostbite problem presumably because exposure time was too low -- the air at lower heights was warming up, with ground temps more like -5C or -10C (23 to 14 F).

Here's a long answer for you and anyone else: It can be a more relaxed sport than skydiving, providing a lot more time airborne. I've had flights of an hour just ridge soaring along a 200 foot high hill, and flights of a few hours at better sites. When the winds and weather don't cooperate, though, then you get to do a lot of parawaiting or short glides straight to the bottom of the hill. Being a skydiver helps somewhat in paragliding, mainly just in general comfort with being airborne, having a feel for speeds and descent rates, evaluating wind and weather, and having a basic understanding of aerodynamics. But there are so many details that are different, where one has to really pay attention to the differences. Not only are the canopies big, but they're trimmed to fly efficiently, not like the ground-hungry trim angle used for many skydiving canopies. Their large size means they react more slowly than small ZP skydiving canopies, but the long lines, high aspect ratio, and improved aerodynamics mean that the canopy has more of a mind of its own when the canopy becomes distorted as in a stall. The canopy can build up a lot more momentum, and can't be flung around as quickly as a small skydiving canopy. Still, very advanced pilots do some incredible aerobatics, including loops and helicopter spins. As people have said before, paragliding has its own instructional system, and it is dangerous to try to do without. At the very beginner level, however, paragliding is so ludicrously easy to do; anyone can be taught to fly short flights down a hundred foot training hill in smooth winds in a few hours. Although paragliding can include floating about in nice conditions, it can also involve a lot of concentration. There's risk from being closer to the ground for longer. If ridge soaring a smaller site, one may be repeatedly flying back and forth fifty feet off the trees. Any misjudgement of the turns or of changes in the wind can result in dropping into the trees. (Just what conditions a paraglider pilot will fly in depends a lot on their local sites, whether they are flying low ridges or high mountains, ridge soaring, or flying in thermals.) Because of paragliders' low speeds, and the tendency of winds to speed up as they cross over hills, paragliders can't fly in as strong winds as hang gliders do. Paraglider pilots must be careful not to get "blown back" over the back of the hill, where the turbulence can literally be a killer. Compared to skydiving, a paraglider pilot needs to learn more about micrometeorolgy. At least skydivers are given a basic understanding of thermals and turbulence around obstacles. Paragliders do have to be flown more carefully than parachutes in stronger wind or thermal conditions. (And those are also the conditions where it is easier to stay airborne.) Paragliders are subject to partial collapses, typically where one tip or one whole side of the canopy will fold under. Everyone trains for dealing with it, preventing the canopy from starting to spiral, and reinflating the collapsed side. Paraglider stalls can be quite violent and are normally not done until one is experienced. A bad recovery can sling the pilot into the lines and canopy. If a pilot is not aware of the feel of their canopy, it isn't hard to stall one side of the canopy when making a deeply braked turn. It's easy not to notice that kind of stall creeping up, even on a student canopy. Ground handling a paraglider in moderate winds takes practice. The pilot is dealing with a giant kite that'll pull them off their feet and drag them into the bushes if they don't handle it right. One can spend hours practicing ground handling, just kiting the glider on level ground. Some background flight & construction data: Paragliding canopies are normally quite large, 24 - 28 sq. metres (260 - 300 ft sq). Glide ratios are above 6:1 even for beginner wings now. Speeds are slow, such as 35-40 km/h in full flight (22-25 mph), and 50+ km/h (30+ mph) using the speedbar -- a sophisticated equivalent to pulling down the front risers but using a foot-actuated cord. The cell count (counting each chamber, so a "9-cell" skydiving canopy would be =18) is about 35 to 75. Aspect ratios 5 to 6. Peter Chapman (25 hours paraglider airtime)

Any idea what kind of plastic is being used as stiffeners for secondary riser covers or tuck tabs at the shoulders? Main flap tuck tabs are often .060" plastic, I hear, but flexible secondary riser covers might need to be .030" to keep them thin and flexible. From different sources I've heard of HDPE, LDPE (for more flexibility) and Nylon MDS being used for stiffening. Peter Chapman

Here's my personal list of suggestions for background on-line reading. Perhaps others have better info: RWS pictures on a well built 3-ring & riser: http://www.relativeworkshop.com/support/tech_risers.html (There was a DZ.com post which I can't find right now, where someone from RWS -- I thought it was Booth himself -- did find some relaxation of the rules in the above article acceptable (whatever that means), when counselling someone with a particular set of risers that didn't meet the specs in the document. My handwritten notes were: Regarding Rule A that the big ring touch the tape for the 2nd ring, a 1/8" gap would be acceptable. Regarding Rule B, pulling the loop out to the side of the riser to check slack, 1/4" was still acceptable.) A 1995 RWS bulletin: http://www.relativeworkshop.com/pdf_files/techpsb_120199.pdf Jump Shack articles: (Go to www.jumpshack.com, Technical Articles) The following two provide info on inspection for correct construction: -- Jump Shack 3-Ring Inspection Instructions -- The 3 Ring: What It Is, And How It Works The following cover other riser related topics: -- Cause Of Type 17 Riser Failures Identified -- Type 17 Riser Study -- The 3-Ring System - Retain and Release Sub-System -- Analysis of a Riser 1997 Skydivemag (the British magazine) article on 3-rings - about reversed risers and force ratios.: http://www.bpa.org.uk/skydive/pages/articles/oct97/kitnews.htm RWS also has 3-ring construction diagrams available, but I haven't checked about how to obtain / buy them. Sorry no clicky. Peter Chapman

Good to hear that their reserves flare. I've only flown one of National's square mains, a Renegade 220 (at 170 lbs suspended), and it had a very weak flare, even when flaring aggressively. National had a brake line mod available for it to improve the flare. I still prefer their round canopies; at least you don't expect to stand it up. Peter Chapman

Here's a question perhaps best answered by those who were active jumpers in the waning days of round reserves. It has long been said that round canopies manlfunction more often than squares. But I think much of that is based on knowledge of the old days of main and reserve rounds that didn't use diapers (or, for troop parachutes, before mesh anti-inversion netting). (a) Anyone have an idea how round reserves with diapers fare for opening reliability? I'm just guessing that their effective reliability is no worse than squares, and even perhaps a bit better because some types of malfunctions with them are more controllable & survivable. (b) When did round reserves start getting diapers? From reading old adverts and the Poynter manuals, it seems like at one time (early 80s?) a lot of emphasis was made on making round reserves as lightweight as possible. E.g., some certifications in the Low Speed category, National Phantoms before the days of the added kevlar bands, stories about the Pioneer TriCon (don't know what the issue was, but it was downgraded from Standard to Low Speed category) (c) Just how much of a problem were these light weight reserves, as far as resulting in reserve damage during rogue openings at terminal velocity? It would be interesting to read USPA accident reports from those days. Blowing a gore or two is still quite survivable, but if the lower lateral band blows, even with other lateral bands up top, I guess it's usually game over.

For what it's worth, one isn't generally allowed to jump through clouds in Canada according to the Canadian Air Regulations. Dropping through clouds isn't as big an issue with just a few jumpers from a C-182, but still there might be other air traffic below the clouds. We all know that pilots sometimes stray over DZs even when it is strongly recommended they stay clear of Class F airspace around DZs. (Exception: totally uncontrolled airspace, which is rare anywhere near any major city. I'm not sure of the situation there, as DZs in such an area may or may not be required to get an SFOC anyway.) (References: SFOC's in CAR 623.38, & Exemption to 602.26a/603.37)

Some posters here have gotten the Onyx cell configuration all figured out. To help in visualizing it, here's a quick sketch scanned into JPG of my interpretation. It shows a section of cells between line attachments.

What material is commonly being used these days for main container closing loops? 1000 lb Spectra seems to be one choice; but I also see loops that are still made of the thin nylon sheathing with the diagonal dotted lines -- Type IIA, which I understand is essentially coreless Type II nylon cord. I have seen the type IIA listed as 225 lb strength, but I've also heard 100 lb. Why the discrepancy? Or is it a mixup about different kinds of sheathing? I'm wondering whether the sheathing is considered strong enough these days, given that stronger (although more easily damaged) Spectra is now available. In pre-Cypres days, reserve loops for 1 and 2 pin containers were often made of the sheathing.

Ditto. The scariest thing is stepping across from the dock to the float, wearing 20 lbs of gear and 10 pounds of lead!

I finally came across what appears to be an actual news report from the time of the well known accident. There's no proof that its an actual AP press report, but it appears authentic. (Found at http://www.aarrgghh.com/no_way/noChute.htm) =========== LOUISBURG, NC--An experienced parachutist filmed his own two-mile death plunge after he fell from an airplane while carrying a video camera but apparently without realizing he had no parachute, investigators said Tuesday. Officials declared the death Saturday of Ivan Lester McGuire, 35, of Durham, an accident. Franklin County sheriff's Capt. Ralph Brown said there was no foul play and no indication of suicide, although "a man who has jumped 800 times ought to remember his parachute." "A man who has jumped 800 times ought to remember his parachute." The videotape shows McGuire leaving the plane, apparently without problems, Brown said. Other parachutists then jump and free fall, but disappear when they pop their parachutes and McGuire plunges on toward the ground at 150 mph. McGuire, who was carrying a video camera mounted on his helmet, was filming a student and an instructor at Franklin County Sports Parachute Center about 20 miles from Raleigh. The plane's pilot, Mark Luman, couldn't be found for comment and had no telephone listing. Brown said the pilot "wasn't in any position to see what happened in the back of the plane." The videotape showed the divers making preparations around the plane's door; then the camera went out with McGuire. With the camera aimed up toward the plane, the tape then shows the instructor and the student jump and freefall somewhat above McGuire. The jump appeared to be proceeding normally until the instructor and student opened their parachutes and receded rapidly from view as McGuire hurtled below them. "The pictures get to moving real fast because he's approaching the ground at 150 mph" "It kind of appears he reached for his parachute and didn't have one," Brown said. "But the release for his (McGuire's) parachute is on his right hip, and when that right hand goes down, the left hand comes forward and it comes into camera view." After several seconds of jerky motion, the tape shows the ground approaching. "Then the pictures get to moving real fast because he's approaching the ground at 150 mph," Brown said. McGuire's body was found in woods about 11/ 2 miles from the airfield. Footage of the final stage of the plunge was destroyed on impact and what tape remained had to be spliced in places, officials said. Brown said blood samples will show whether McGuire had alcohol or drugs in his system and test results should be ready in about a week. Although an expert jumper, McGuire could have forgotten to put on his parachute because of fatigue or preoccupation with his video equipment, Mrs. Fayard was quoted as saying. A Federal Aviation Administration investigator said Monday he was checking to see if the pilot knew whether McGuire was wearing a parachute when he entered the airplane, as FAA regulations require. Sheriff Arthur Johnson said Tuesday the investigation showed the pilot thought McGuire was wearing a parachute. But Walter L. Riggsbee, the FAA investigator, said the video equipment may have been mistaken for a parachute. Copyright © Associated Press, April 5, 1988

My vote: "Lemmings Extremes" -- billed as the 'best and worst of Bridge Day' - from video shot over about a decade of the event. I've shown it at the DZ, and it is 55 minutes of non-stop cringing, "holy @%#^", and "phew!" exclamations by those watching. Awesome. By far the most jumps end up working out injury free despite everything that happens. It makes one aware of the many things that can go wrong (even an uncocked pilot chute), as well as showing some of the more audacious and odd jumps that have taken place there. I don't think it would be the most educational for advanced BASE jumpers but a novice would benefit from seeing a lot of the types of problems that can occur, especially bad launches. Source: www.lemmingsvideo.com. Reasonably priced too.

Don't know anything about him but he's still around. Saw Frenchy at the Canadian nationals this summer in Alberta.

Anyone got ideas for carrying out a flour bombing contest? I'm helping organize one. The flour will likely be in baggies, and distances can be measured from a target on the ground. It would be for jumpers of all experience levels and canopy types. The question is how to enforce some sort of minimum drop altitude, so the flour isn't just dropped on a short final approach. Some possibilities: -- State a minimum altitude, that should be enough to allow a drop plus sufficient time to still set up for landing. (500', or even more to really give the fast canopy fliers time) The altitude limit would be hard to enforce, but a judge would still watch jumpers for any obvious violations. To be fancy, one judging station could be 500' abeam the drop target, so that, assuming the drops are close to overhead the target, the jumper should be at about 45 degrees or more above the horizon when dropping. Another possibility is to time the time-of-fall of the flour bomb to check for too-low drops, but that requires calibration tests and starts getting complicated. -- 'The bomb can't be dropped on final approach' - the jumper must make at least a 90 degree turn before landing. It's a nice thought but could lead to low hooks. -- Have the landing area offset certain distance away from the drop target (outside of typical swoop distance!) While the density of a small flour bomb should be reasonable, we'd still keep the drop area clear of spectators. Peter Chapman Toronto, Ontario

Time: summer, 1992 Location: a mountain trail in southern Germany I'm hiking down a steep trail when coming the other way I see a couple women. They have skydiving T-shirts on. Cool! At the time I was a newbie with maybe 150 jumps. The printing on the T-shirts was even in English, so I stop and talk the woman in front. I say that I'm a skydiver, and ask if she jumps. (I'm thinking, is she really a skydiver or just someone who did one jump and bought the T-shirt?) She says yes. I ask, "How many jumps?" "Eight thousand." Momentary pause. I reply, "Uh, what's your name?" "Cheryl Stearns" "Yeah, I've heard of you." Turns out she was sightseeing at the time, as the world style & accuracy championships were taking place a week or two later in Austria. Peter Chapman

I've jumped a rig from ~'83 for the last 10 years, then this year upgraded half-way to modern by buying a rig from about '93. The old rig, in which I've fit F-111 canopies from 200 to 265 ft sq, has been great for basic CRW, taking to Bridge Day, canopy trashing, and screwing around low under canopy (eg, 180 hook turns to landing from, like, fifty feet). You learn to fly whatever you've got, towards the edges of its own performance envelope. Old gear is great for its adaptability! - although bridle or riser protection may need upgrading. My '93 rig came with a Sabre 135. I also bought a used FX88 to use in the same rig. By having two sets of risers/bags/pilot chutes, and a careful system for storage, canopies can be quickly swapped without even repacking. To make the FX88 fit safely, I've sewn in a 'pillow' below the reserve container. Dense foam padding can be inserted to use with the small canopy, or removed for the larger canopy. If I'm ever jumping in the US, they should be able to allow me the 180 day Canadian repack cycle, as the rig sure isn't TSO'd any more... Peter Chapman Toronto, Canada (Canadian rigger)

Up here in Canada getting gear for an intentional hasn't been hindered by regulations (or varying interpretations of them). At the couple DZ's that I've called home, the set up has always been very simple: An old military belly mount is used, hooked to one's harness by separable D-rings, below one's handles. The lower corners of the belly mount are tied off to some other part of the harness to keep the container from swinging about. (Separable D rings aren't common but do exist; eg they were used to replace a batch of bad D-rings in about 1982-1983 without restitching major parts of the harness.) If the tersh had to be activated, the separable D-rings would ride up on one's harness, which might cause some minor damage. But nobody worries about that since it's only a last ditch thing if the reserve fails. Anyone using this setup naturally needs to be trained on manual deployment procedures. Peter Chapman Toronto, ON

Actually having the chance to use a hook knife seems rather rare, but I'll give a very unusual example of where the knife was useful: A jumper once had her reserve go over the tail of the aircraft on exit. The reserve was shredded, but she didn't hit the tail and was conscious. She hook-knifed all the lines, then deployed her main canopy. This jumper only had about 40 jumps. Impressive. [I remember this from USPA accident reports, in the early to mid 1990s]

If we're just tossing ideas around, here's one: Lines that combine dacron & spectra -- Most round emergency canopies for hang glider pilots use dacron lines, because of tradition and for the supposed shock absorbing effect. The canopies are built very light compared to round skydiving reserves. One US company's top-of-the-line hang glider reserve uses spectra lines for minimum bulk, except for sections of line, a couple feet long, which are dacron. I think the dacron sections are at the canopy end of the lines. Whether the short sections of dacron provide useful shock absorption, I don't know. Peter Chapman Toronto, Canada

To update my original post: I have since read that PD did drop test their smallest reserves to a higher weight than necessary for the certification weight. As others noted, the certification weight may therefore be to satisfy descent rate requirements. They tested to 300 pounds and 180 knots, I was told, which corresponds to the *1.2 factor used for certification to the typical 254 lb and 150 kts. Good to hear!!

> hma and vectran are both aramids. vectran is just a trade name... I believe Vectran, which is described as a liquid crystal polymer, is NOT an aramid. The makers of the Vectran product (Celanese) say this: "Vectran fiber is a polyester-polyarylate fiber. The differences between Vectran fiber and two other high-performance fibers [...] are as follows: Vectran fiber is thermotropic, it is melt-spun, and it melts at a high temperature. Aramid fiber is lyotropic, it is solvent-spun, and it does not melt at high temperature." In any case, it is the actual differences or similarities of the two materials that matter.

Small correction: After the pilot was informed, he climbed a few thousand feet before the jumper freed himself.

Yes, it did happen. About a month ago at Skydive Toronto during a 4-way competition. The jumper in question is a well known Ontario RW jumper. I'm not sure quite why the jumper was able to free himself when he did, but I'm guessing it was after the pilot stopped descending at high airspeed and slowed down. The jumper got free at low altitude (~1000' I was told), and pulled his reserve. After landing, the jumper wasn't initially seen to be moving, so a person on another load volunteered to jump in. He saw wires at the last moment and either clipped them or maneuvered to avoid them, breaking bones in feet/ankles. The rumour I had heard was that the jumper whose bootie had caught, had reinforced the bootie with webbing -- after all, booties do get a lot of wear. Whether or not this is correct, this is one area where less strength may occasionally be an asset. Another jumper at the DZ had caught a bootie years ago, and in that case the bootie ripped and freed him before getting close to the ground.

Two things people don't often seem to look at when choosing a reserve: 1) Certification speed. Typical values for the max deployment speed are 130 or 150 kts depending on the standard the manufacturer used. It looks like only the older TSO-C23 / AS8015 standards allowed the 130 kts. Newer chutes should all be 150 kts minimum. Eg: PD-126R: 150 Super Raven, Microraven: 130. Amigo: 150 (I don't have numbers on the Raven-M, but I bet it's 150 since it's a relatively new design. Anyone got the numbers on the Tempo??) 2) Certification weight The manufacturer may recommend certain weights based on ability to land the canopy reasonably well, but the actual certification weight may be higher. One reason I like the PD-126 over the 113 is that from the PD-253 on downwards to the PD-126, the certification weight is 254 lb. For the PD-113 and 106, that weight was reduced to 220 lb. Who knows, both might be fine during tests at 254 lb due to similar construction, but I like the idea of having that extra bit of actual demonstrated strength. Part of the reason jumpers don't look at this stuff much is that it can be hard to find on manufacturers' web sites, and is sometimes only found in owner's manuals or TSO placards. For example, Precision's web site mentions the Absolute Max Load for the 120-M as 168 lb at sea level. It might be implied that this is not actually the certification limit, but if so, the certification limit isn't shown. I'm not saying that designs without the highest values are in any way not safe; just that these are additional pieces of evidence about the product involved. (The only reserve ride I've had in 600 jumps was under my Phantom 24 a few weeks back after a CRW wrap...) Peter Chapman Toronto, Canada

Let's get this straight everyone: The DZ that used military rounds was the Parachute School of Toronto. It is not Skydive Toronto, run by Joe Chow. Yeah, similar names. Whenever Skydiver Toronto jumpers have done displays at malls or sports shows, they keep on having to explain to people that they're not the place where "this guy you know broke his leg"... Skydive Toronto (some distance west of Barrie) does crank out a lot of students, using the traditional static line progression system, and do use square/square rigs. The latest news is that Joe is now up to 6 C-182's, although they are certainly never all flying at once. (How you manage the airplanes in operation is more important than the total number!) He's also switching from 2 Strong tandem rigs to 6 Vector Sigma rigs. Both Coldwater and Markham have shut down, the former because of the owner's retirement. The new owner of the Parachute School of Toronto is in the process of opening up again, but with all new gear. No more rounds. Last I heard, he'll be at the Baldwin airport, site of the former Markham Skydiving.