IJskonijn

Yup, my viso barely even registers half of my jumps. Granted, doing CRW I don't wait around in freefall waiting for my Viso to catch up. I simply gave up on the idea of logging, but it sometimes think I started my jump at 2000ft, just because I was dicking around with stalling my canopy after the CRW-work was over but before landing pattern. If I stop doing the stalls, I might use the logging as a chop counter, since that's the only time I do freefall anyway nowadays!

http://www.flyaerodyne.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Diablo.pdf If I'm reading it right for the 150, the brakelines should be 551mm longer than the A-lines with the brakes unstowed, and 135mm longer than the A-lines with the brakes stowed. This means the brake setting loop should be 416mm above the toggle. If the brakelines are this far out of whack, you might benefit from checking the entire linetrim carefully.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T913e_HAAOc Nope, not harder. It just requires more stupidity, but these guys don't seem to be lacking in that department...

The problem worth fixing is indeed that the pin sometimes moves when it's not supposed to, but in my opinion the solutions are already known. And if people can't be bothered to keep a tight closing loop and to keep their rig in mind when moving around and out of the aircraft, I'd kindly ask them to go bother some other sport. I have never seen any ill effects due to being too aware about your gear.

It looks like a perfect solution to a very real problem! No longer will riggers have to go cold or hungry for lack of work. As an added advantage, the Darwin Awards are about to get much more interesting!

Bill Morrisey gave a two-piece interview to Skydive Radio a few shows back, show #222 and #223. A very interesting listen into tandem jumping history, and from what I gather from that the drogue thing came along relatively early in the tandem development.

Thanks! Those results are very similar to what a friend of mine also came up with. That means they should be rooted in known physics. The biggest uncertainty in guessing the landing area from those numbers is the winds. My freebag was found about 1.5km downwind of my exit point. If I assume 1000ft/minute for freebag descend, I get winds of 1.92m/s (averaged). That would put your results for my main location at 432 to 509 meters downwind of the exit point, much further than I would get from the 8x to 12x faster descend rate than a freebag guess earlier in this thread. I've already searched the area indicated by your results (for only 2,5 hours, since I had to go to Tallinn to catch my flight home), so I think I'll put more priority in the further upwind numbers (unsearched area), and revisit the already-searched area if nothing shows up further upwind. If anyone else has any tips/tricks/info, I'd love to hear it. The better I can determine both the likely location and the realistic error in said location, the more chance I have of finding it again when I (or someone else) go back out there.

Pilot chute was about 80cm diameter. Weight of a Lightning 160 is estimated at 3.1kg (my carry-on luggage was 12.9kg when I left and 9.8kg when I got back). A friend of mine has already tried to make a guesstimate of the descend speed of a baglocked canopy, his result is approximately 18m/s (averaged, since terminal velocity decreases with decreasing altitude/increasing density). But feel free to redo the math, it may yield something useful. What's the descend rate of a freebag+pilot? I've currently guesstimated it at 1000ft/minute, since that's about the same we have under Lightnings and I've kept level with a freebag a few times in the past quite easily. Using that together with the distance between chop and finding yields an average 1.92m/s winds (true, winds were very light that morning). Coupling that to the 18m/s calculated descend rate of the baglocked canopy yields a wind-drift of 422m from 13kft. Much more than the guesstimated 8x to 12x faster earlier in this thread (that gives me 188m and 125m drift respectively). I lost the canopy at the Parasummer boogie near Pärnu, so if anyone from Estonia (or Latvia) is willing to go search for it based on my data you'd make me very happy. Otherwise I'll likely go myself for a long weekend in a last all-or-nothing attempt.

So.... I lost my canopy this week. Doing CRW, opened into a baglock, chopped it at ~13kft. Luckily there was very little wind. I know my exit point, and my freebag was later brought in (found by a local) and I know where they found it. Searching on the ground between those two points yielded no result, but its partially forest area with heavy undergrowth. Does anyone have experience with the descend rate of a baglocked canopy with open pilot chute (plus some lines trailing, I only had two stows on it) vs an empty freebag (Vector 2 to be specific)? The canopy was a Lightning 160, of which I do not know the weight (guesstimate ~4kg?). Any and all information that can help me more accurately determine the search area would be much appreciated. Maybe some inquisitive mind did some tests on those descend rates in a big empty field?

My personal experience is with a Silhouette 190 at 1.16 wingloading. I put about 100-150 jumps on her (before I stopped doing that weird freefall stuff and focussed on CRW). At that wingloading, I found her to be a relatively conservative canopy, easy to handle even in suboptimal conditions, with good flare and forgiving of mistakes. That said, she could be coaxed into misbehaving and/or more agressive manouvres, primarily by messing around with toggles/riser while near the stall point. However, I had to go out of my way to make her do that. During normal flight manouvres, even a deep toggle flat turn, she behaved nicely and predictable. Toggle stall point was very deep, and from full flight to stall took a good 4-5 seconds of keeping the toggles there. I was never worried she might stall on me during flaring. On the Sabre vs Silhouette question, I'd go with the Silhouette because of the aforementioned opening problems that the Sabre is known for. My Silhouette has never given me a bad opening even though I definitely don't iron out the creases during packing, and even during the opening I had with 6+ linetwists she decided to just go fly straight and level while I sorted out the linetwists. Pulse has many of the same features as the Silhouette (F111 bottom skin, trimmed for flat glide, short recovery arc), but I have no personal experience with it. People I know that jump it are very happy with it though.

***That and the fact that there are no regulations or even guidelines on the matter. Just AAD companies doing marketing. These modes have never been tested for best performance in a student situation. They are just names of modes. Some countries do have requirements for using student AADs. Here in the Netherlands our BSR states that if the manufacturer of an AAD has a Student version, that version must be used for the first 25 jumps.

I agree with Terry, don't do stuff to your main canopy unless you are: a) A rigger, b) Under the direct supervision of a rigger, and c) Plenty knowledgable about what you're doing. Flying one without weights (I hate weights, especially the risk of losing them during a demo and giving someone downstairs a permanent headache) is easily done by attaching it to your foot in a pouch, and only hooking it to your riser after you've had a proper deployment. If you want, I can send you a load of photo's of a similar system to mine to use as inspiration. The only limitation with that system is the length from your foot to your riser, anything larger than ~2m high won't fly nicely. A 2m by 3m flag is still a very impressive thing for demo's though. See attached photo for my system in action.

Shall we switch that order around? To me, screaming at someone in the plane is only ever acceptable if there is a serious safety issue, like a pilot chute creeping for the door without the owner realizing it. Anyone screaming stuff like "GO!" in the plane is a giant asshole that need a serious lesson in chilling out. Worst part is when they scream "GO!" or "Door!" or shit like that at me when we have our very own jumprun at lower altitude. Best part is seeing them exit immediately after us when we're doing CRW and going out two miles short

Definitely on the tin of mints! Dangerous stuff, those mints... ^_^

I'd rather not risk my neck on the word "might"...

Probably CRW & poststacks.

Detecting canopy deployment from freefall is likely easy to program, but even L&B's algorithm is unreliable for hop & pops. My viso 2 logs about half my jumps, and my audible regularly goes off during front-riser landing (since I'm exceeding 13m/s on fronts easily). Granted, my opening altitude is at most 10m below the airplane, and my canopy doesn't do that new thing called "snivelling", but still...

I've flown a Silhouette 190 at a 1.1 WL, putting me solidly in the "expert" category according to PD. I started jumping that canopy around 150 jumps, and never had any issues with it, even in less-than-ideal conditions. It has a flatter glide, better flare, lower descend rate than my Lightning 160 at the same exit weight (WL 1.3-1.4), and felt really docile and forgiving in its handling. Maybe PD has a different flying characteristic in mind with their WL interpretations, but I think their rating is extraordinarily conservative for this canopy design. It definitely flies a LOT better than full F111 designs at lower WL, the ZP topskin is helping a lot by preventing the air from bleeding out the top. Also note that my Silhouette 190 is pretty old, and the ZP has likely increased in porosity since.

Dutch KNVvL membership (specifically membership of the Parachute part) does provide secondary third-party insurance (secondary as in: first ask your own insurance, if they don't cover it then the RNAA insurance will cover it). The coverage is up to 1.5M€, with €100 to be paid by yourself per case. Relevant information in Dutch: http://parachute.nl/waverzekering.html And yes, the KNVvL has roughly the same licence structure. We also use A-B-C-D licences, and while the requirments to get them are often (slightly) different, the general level is the same. But, we don't have a sticker system for the different disciplines. As soon as a coach thinks you're safe enough in the discipline, you can go have fun with others.

In fact, the Dutch basic safety regulations require that you wear an open-face helmet during the first 25 wingsuit jumps!

My personal experience with the Silhouette 190 is one of joy. I bought it at around 150 jumps as part of my very first rig, and have loved jumping it ever since. It's a forgiving canopy in its handling (much like the Navigator), has a decend flare but is still fun and sporty enough to learn more advanced techniques on. So go talk with your instructor (who has seen your flying) about this, and give the Silhouette 190 a test jump. So far, I haven't heard of anyone who was disappointed with it.

Agreed, if you have any doubts about your reserve, go bigger until you stop having doubts. My rationale is this: If I'm on my reserve canopy, it is very likely that I'm also: 1. at low altitude, 2. at a less-than-ideal spot, 3. in a high-stress state of mind. For each point separately, I would rather have more fabric (=slower decend-rate, more time to react and think) than less fabric over my head, and combining them makes that even more valid. The only counter-argument I've heard so far is high-wind situations. You could be penetrating into the wind on your main, but going backwards under your (lighter loaded and larger) reserve. By the way, I have a PDR193 reserve (WL 1.1), a Lightning 160 main (WL 1.3-1.4), and occasionally a Silhouette 190 main (WL 1.1), at roundabout 650 jumps. I have no inclination whatsoever to downsize any of my canopies.

A protec will work perfectly fine with an audible. Just loop a rubber stow around one of the bars in the ear openings, and use that to hold the audible. I jumped like that for easily 150-200 jumps before switching to a fullface. Ninja edit: assuming a full shell helmet, not the half shell.

One in just under two years :). Still on my first '97 Nissan Micra, small enough to fit in my back pocket and big enough to get me where I want to go. Also, it's got bloody good fuel economy for a 20-year old car, I'm averaging 18 km/L.

CRW (Canopy Relative Work, also known as Canopy Formation) mod is the flap on the bottom reserve container flap that goes over the top reserve flap (the one protecting your pin). It is meant to prevent lines from catching under the top flap and exposing your reserve pin. It's nice to have if you are planning to do CRW, but otherwise has no use. In general, I would not walk away just because of the age of the rig. If it is technically sound, fits properly and has all the bells & whistles you want (RSL and AAD for example), it should be perfectly good. Although as already mentioned, it is likely not suited for freeflying. That said, only a rigger is really able to tell if it is technically sound, so go find one and have a chat with him/her about this rig.