crazy

What kind of search did you do? I tried "him, him, fuck him" on google. The 1st and 2nd results i got were hash harriers songs ("why was he born so beautiful?" and "flatlander hymnal"). The 3rd one was Wendy Faulkner's page. None of these were unexpected -- Come

Oh my, this is a reference! I have to quote it here: Of course no confirmation of this claim. This is a very bad case of rumor mongering indeed (there are much better stories on urbanLegends.com). Even the rumors about HMA lines banned from the paragliding industry were not as pathetic as this one. Are all the safety issues about HMA line as convincing as this one? BTW, in Perris, mid septembre (+- 1 week), a steering line broke. It was a spectra line with 100 jumps. Is this enough to ban spectra? -- Come

You guys crack me up. two years ago, you claimed that you were not familiar with that canopy, you even asked me who is the manufacturer. Later on, you gave me a follow up where Stane claims that, 4 years earlier, he built 2 prototypes of the nitro, for Klaus. Now you claim that you were the "original manufacturer of the nitro". Are you still talking about these 2 protos from 96? Or did you actually manufacture the final product? Well, i don't think that the nitro died. Klaus Schenk's creation is still alive, he survived through his designs and his genius is still recognized by quite a few people. People have been jumping these canopies for some 5 years now, without special incidents. Of course lines break, but spectra steering lines can break after 100 jumps as well (it really happened). There is no evidence that HMA (or technora) lines have an unusual rate of failure in skydiving (if someone has, please tell me). The horror stories from the paragliding world have to be put back in their own context. If HMA was so unsafe, it wouldn't be used for marine applications (sails, ropes), extreme sports (rock climbing, paragliding, skydiving), aerostats, aerospace applications, submarine applications... My feeling is that there is a good feedback from many types of applications, no alarmist report from skydiving, few (identified) problems not necessarily relevant to skydiving. Apart from this, i must say that i really like the fact that there is no significant change in the length of the lines. With 1 jump or 200 jumps, the openings and flight characteristics are almost the same. For my needs it sounds like a very good product, much better than spectra. -- Come

80F to 60F is less than 4% variation in density. Can easily be insignificant once mixed with all the other objective and subjective factors affecting your perception of the recovery arc. If it's not your perception, maybe it's because you guys swoop at relativistic speed which can significantly modify the implications of the ideal gas law... or maybe 1) you notice more easily people digging out when you want to convince yourself that it's not just you 2) your perception is affected the same way as other people's -- Come

This is an excellent view of the problem indeed. Hopefully, it will help to get rid of blunt (and dangerous) claims like: - faster is safer in turbulence - smaller is safer in turbulence -- Come

The PD FAQ about turbulence... I still don't understand their point. So, what's PD's answer? Is the larger slower canopy (or lighter wing loading) less safe, as implied in the two 1st sentence and the second paragraph? Or is the smallest faster canopy less safe as implied in the last sentences of the 1st paragraph? Are they really implying that the risk to have 3 cells collapsing is higher on a large canopy than on a small one? Or are they just mixing the comfort issue (bumpy ride) with the actual safety issue (collapse, loss of altitude. loss of controllability)? -- Come

My comment stands for a conservative landing with a spectre 170 at a low wing loading. Sorry, i thought it was obvious in the context. -- Come Skydive Asia

If you are holding the knife in the right hand, cut the left risers first (right risers first if you are holding the knife in the left hand). -- Come

not specially new models but mainly new sizes. I don't know the detail but the one i ordered is a bit more narrow and a bit longer, with a smaller main container. Basically a better fit for taller people and more radical differences between the size of the main and the size the reserve. -- Come

short answer: don't. If it's steep, anyway, you can probably land further down on a flater area. If there is no alternate landing area, consider landing across the slope, it might be much easier. If you really have to land downhill, flare a bit later, slower, try to adjust the glide to the slope, and slide it on your butt (it will be less painful than face planting while running like hell downhill). If it's just a gentle slope, don't do anything different... but make sure you get the right reference: your landing point (not the ground below you when you start flaring) There is no point to flare differently (your canopy doesn't care about the relief below you when you fly). bb -- Come -- Come Skydive Asia

What's the purpose of this canopy if it's not to be landed? -- come

So, don't lengthen them anymore. They might even be too long already. When your lines are too long, you loose some controlability during the flare, under some circumstances it can be dangerous (unsuspected turbulences or the asshole crossing right in front of you for instance). In addition you will have shorter swoops. Bucking is normal if you pull too much on both risers (you create a step between the B and C lines). Now, if you have some bucking when you pull only one riser, it's really surprising. Your canopy is a hornet 170, right? What wing loading? Do you have long or short arms? How deep do you burry your riser? -- Come

thanks a lot everybody for all the info. Sunrise rigging told me that they will check if they can make a wings with my requirements. If that fails, i'll ask what can be done with the sidewinder and the infinity. Finally, including the racer and the mirage, there seems to be many choices. Nice to see that several manufacturers are so open to our requirements. -- Come -- Come Skydive Asia

Thanks for the advice. Unfortunately, the problem is not about the size of the harness but about the size of the containers. PdF, like several other manufacturers, provides only rigs with reserve containers approximately the same size as the main container (this still puzzles me). I actually have an atom 0 and i really have lots of serious problems because the main canopy doesn't fill the container. -- Come

Yes, i asked them directly. They actualy select the most suitable container among the existing sizes. I already load my reserve at ~1.4, my exit weight is a bit less than 220lbs, it's the reason why i don't like the idea of downsizing the reserve. Even though the manufacturer recommends a very conservative max exit weight, a nitro can be loaded at 2.8, maybe more, as long as you have the experience to handle it. The recommended wing loading of the blade (high performance nitro) ranges from 2.0 to 2.7. -- Come

I'm trying to find a new rig with there requirements: - 88 sqft, non cross-braced, non air locked, 9 cell ZP main. Later a 78sqft - 155 sqft reserve (packs like a PD143) - no velcros to wear out the lines on my main The only perfect match that i could find is a mirage m1z. But i don't like the mirage and i think it's too expensive. The next near match is either the wings w-10-1, but the main container is too big already, or the wings w-7 but i have to downsize the reserve 10 a 140 sqft and i don't really want to. I like the wings, and it's not too expensive, but if i'm going to put a lot of money in a new rig, i'd prefer a perfect match. The only other possibility that i see is a racer but last time i saw one of those, there were too many velcros for my taste. Did anybody try a racer with kevlar or HMA lines? Are there other manufacturers who produce rigs with such a big difference between the size of the main and the size of the reserve? bb come [beer adjudicator] www.skydiveasia.org

Actually, they are. Ever heared about the golden chicken plant? Watch this

For technical reasons, there are no elliptical canopies. Canopies are not rigid wings and it would be too difficult to build a real elliptical. So, all non rectangular ram air parachutes are tapered. As many people already said on this thread, "elliptical" is only a good marketing word. Fully elliptical (sometimes) means tapered on the leading edge and the trailing edge, with a constant aspect ratio on each cell, both in width and thickness (shorter cells are narrower and thinner). Semi elliptical means many different things and is almost useless marketting terminology. Anyway, taper is only a contributing factor among many others for the flight characteristics. Some very high performance canopies are almost rectangular. The structure, the trim, the airfoil, the thickness and the nose can be much more important than the planform. come

I thought they were made in korea. Is there a manufacturing plant in germany? -- Come Skydive Asia

This depends very much on the canopy, the wingloading and the initial speed and attitude. It's true that all things being equal, if you release the front risers slowly, you induce less pendulum effect and the canopy takes more time to flatten out (including the time to let the risers go). However, it seems that you did a different manoeuver, so the dive and the speed were probably different from what you usually do. Maybe, to prevent this type of incident, it might be a good idea to abort the manoeuver. When there are unexpected circumstances, abort the swoop. If you did, rather than pulling both risers again, you would have saved lots of worries to your girlfriend. Of course, this means that you have to plan the manoeuver so that it's safe to abort it at any time. The second important thing is to learn to recover nicely from an aborted (or planned too high) swoop. If you release your risers too early, your canopy flattens out and slows down 10 feet above the ground. It can make the landing tricky. To avoid this, keep your hands on the front risers and push a little bit (around 1-2 inch). It requires much less strength that pulling the risers down. The canopy will not completely flaten out and will keep enough speed for a normal flare. If you can do it properly, you won't be worried about starting your turn too high or releasing your risers too early. If you had proper instruction, you would know that the the point is not about moaning but about paying beer for "gross safety violations not resulting in serious injury or death". Just a kind reminder. Come

well, the problem is that there is not much info on the web site www.hipercanopies.de (babelfish.altavista.com will translate it). -- Come Skydive Asia

did anybody try these? Any input or comment? Come -- Come Skydive Asia

if everything looks fine, and if the reserve flap was still covering the pin, it means that the pin was pulled. It was probably pulled by the cable (that's close to rocket science, isn't it?). It is extremely important to know why it happened because the same problem WILL happen again, maybe during climb out. Take it seriously and don't accept unlikely scenarios. Possible explanation include: - harness too small - cable damaged (or already pulled by a RSL) - handle damaged (or not properly designed) - small rocks in the cable housing - RSL snagged on something - ... Or any combination. BTW, I thought that the spring loaded PC on the mirage was powerful enough to fire the PC 20 feet away. I would be worried to jump a rig where the reserve PC doesn't even clear the flaps. -- Come

No. When such a serious problem happens, you should, first cool down, then talk with the other jumpers involved to find out what happened. Did you (or the other) track along the jumprun? Was the exit order appropriate (why did you exit last)? Why did you exit too early... Maybe there is no obvious and straightforward answer, but at least you will get a better understanding and you will have a better chance to prevent the problem next time. -- Come -- Come Skydive Asia