This might change a few things: Epicene wingsuit canopy

[Slater 0]

The111

******The 2 prototypes that are out floating around northern California might take some cues from the matrix but all I can say is that they are very much considering further development of those prototypes if enough interest is generated.

I hear x-brace have opening character not good for wingsuit or BASE, yes?

Is true or not?

Slater

Opening characteristics are most likely determined by planform, not bracing.

But flipwithit say "Most xbrace canopies (jvx, jfx, velo, xaos, etc) are a high performance design and the cross bracing makes a more rigid wing so it can be loaded higher. This 5 cell xbrace is very square (think sabre 1 square) so it won't have the tendency to take off like an elliptical but can be loaded higher and still fun to fly! "

Is sound for me like bracing IS part of planform, yes?

And flipwithit, I jump Sabre I many times, is not square at all - is 2.5:1 aspect ratio - unless is only corners you mean, yes? Then yes, is very square corners, not rounded any, but not square wing.

Slater

McConkey es Dios

[The111 1]

Slater

Is sound for me like bracing IS part of planform, yes?

No. Planform describes the outer surface of the wing. It dictates the wing's aerodynamic properties.

Bracing describes the internal structure of a wing. It dictates the wing's mechanical properties.

Take a Spectre and cross-brace the hell out of it, and you're not going to change the way it opens or its suitability for WS deployments. It's just going to pack up a lot bigger.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[GoneCodFishing 24]

The111

Take a Spectre and cross-brace the hell out of it, and you're not going to change the way it opens

Oh yes, it will. You are welcome to try but i wouldn't recommend it unless you want to know what a terminal opening with no slider would feel like.

That's the reason the closing of the nose cells came along, and it was a stalemate of the early attempts at crossbracing.

[The111 1]

GoneCodFishing

***
Take a Spectre and cross-brace the hell out of it, and you're not going to change the way it opens

Oh yes, it will. You are welcome to try but i wouldn't recommend it unless you want to know what a terminal opening with no slider would feel like.

I can believe that cross-bracing would effect opening speed.

In terms of stability/reliability (i.e. on-heading) though, I wouldn't think it would have much of an effect when compared to wing shape and aspect ratio, other than the fact that faster openings usually are admittedly somewhat more reliable. But then again, aerodynamics has often been a science where the unexpected happens.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[uberchris 0]

Bealio

Don't you have some ebola to fight?

dont you have an ice cream bar to hit, fatty?
how is war?

gravity brings me down.........

[Slater 0]

The111

***Is sound for me like bracing IS part of planform, yes?

No. Planform describes the outer surface of the wing. It dictates the wing's aerodynamic properties.

Bracing describes the internal structure of a wing. It dictates the wing's mechanical properties.

Take a Spectre and cross-brace the hell out of it, and you're not going to change the way it opens or its suitability for WS deployments. It's just going to pack up a lot bigger.

If you speak true, then is what purpose for x-brace? All talk about x-brace is make more rigid outer surface so is affect aerodynamic properties positive, yes?

Slater

McConkey es Dios

[The111 1]

Slater

If you speak true, then is what purpose for x-brace? All talk about x-brace is make more rigid outer surface so is affect aerodynamic properties positive, yes?

Sure, the structure of an aircraft affects its aerodynamic properties, to the extent that if the aircraft crumples or breaks in half it cannot fly. But directly structure is an entirely different goal than aerodynamics.

A simple analogy:

Imagine you put a much more powerful engine in your car, and now when you accelerate as fast as you can, the extra torque causes your axles to break. You then install a much stronger axle which can handle the torque generated by the new engine. Does this mean that the axle "affects your car's power" or is part of the engine?

The wing's structure is only there to help the wing keep its shape. It is the shape that determines how it flies.

The only point I was making originally is that if you take a wing which is "low-performance" and therefore suitable for WS opening (i.e. square), and then add cross-brace it, you are not turning it into a high-performance wing that is unsuitable for WS opening. Cross-bracing does not imply high performance.

High-performance 7-cells often need cross-bracing to handle the loads generated by those wings, I'd imagine low-performance 5-cells also need cross-bracing, and that maybe the net pack volume of 5 cells + cross-bracing is less than 7 cells without cross-bracing, which is how they're able to make the canopy pack smaller and still perform ok. That's a total guess though.

www.WingsuitPhotos.com

[Slater 0]

The111

***If you speak true, then is what purpose for x-brace? All talk about x-brace is make more rigid outer surface so is affect aerodynamic properties positive, yes?

The wing's structure is only there to help the wing keep its shape. It is the shape that determines how it flies.

.

is what I say all along! xbrace keeps more true shape, more true wing shape fly better, better fly make take off on opening like flipwithit say even though he not say is true with 5-cell. is my think 5-cell xbrace take off to and aspect ratio mean more than cells, yes?

Slater

McConkey es Dios

[flipwithit 0]

Quote

is what I say all along! xbrace keeps more true shape, more true wing shape fly better, better fly make take off on opening like flipwithit say even though he not say is true with 5-cell. is my think 5-cell xbrace take off to and aspect ratio mean more than cells, yes?

Slater

i never said its not true with 5 cell...i said its uncommon with square canopies (okay rectangles if you want to be anal,) and the 5 cell that they are working on is very "squared off." and thats the point, is the design. without getting into a page long post, square is docile, elliptical is high performance and xbrace just makes a more rigid wing that can be loaded higher. and yes a higher wing loading is going to require more skill from the pilot for good openings. however unskilled pilots won't be flying those wing loadings, or shouldn't. people are flying semi elliptical (sabre 2) all day long with good track records. having jumped both, id put my money on the new 5 cell xbraced over a sabre 1 or 2 any day.

[Slater 0]

flipwithit

Quote

is what I say all along! xbrace keeps more true shape, more true wing shape fly better, better fly make take off on opening like flipwithit say even though he not say is true with 5-cell. is my think 5-cell xbrace take off to and aspect ratio mean more than cells, yes?

Slater

i never said its not true with 5 cell...i said its uncommon with square canopies (okay rectangles if you want to be anal,) and the 5 cell that they are working on is very "squared off." and thats the point, is the design. without getting into a page long post, square is docile, elliptical is high performance and xbrace just makes a more rigid wing that can be loaded higher. and yes a higher wing loading is going to require more skill from the pilot for good openings. however unskilled pilots won't be flying those wing loadings, or shouldn't. people are flying semi elliptical (sabre 2) all day long with good track records. having jumped both, id put my money on the new 5 cell xbraced over a sabre 1 or 2 any day.

What you guys say is not what I see in air or hear of manufacturers about x-brace, or that aspect ratio is not count more than round or square edges, I guess maybe I not understand your English right.

Hasta la vista.

Slater

McConkey es Dios

[wstcstcmtr 0]

So has anyone actually got one yet?

[hjumper33 0]

Got my confirmation of delivery mid dec. Ill let everyone know when it arrives

[wstcstcmtr 0]

Please do!

[hjumper33 0]

Got my episcene today. I am replacing a sabre 120. Havent had a chance to jump it becase of shit weather in norcal. Kind of an odd feeling packing a 150 into a bag for a 120, but it fits fairly easily. My 120 was very tight in my Javelin DNKY and id say the episcene 150 has a slightly smaller pack volume, and thats brand new out of the bag. I have an 11 ft bridle with a 32 inche base pilot chute that i converted to a kill line as my setup. Will let everyone know when I jump it first.

[wasatchrider 0]

why the kill line that is going to be a pain in the ass on an 11 foot bridal

BASE 1519

[piisfish 140]

11ft bridle ? Get rid of the PC and get a 7k ft static line

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[hjumper33 0]

It's not hard to cock the pilot chute at all. The distance is nice, and not having the center cell deflect like 18 inches back from a non kill line was well worth an hour of sewing.

[strife 0]

Ive order a 170 to go into a Curv VC1 now the grey and black Porcher is available time frame was late Jan.

[nickfrey 0]

hjumper33

It's not hard to cock the pilot chute at all. The distance is nice, and not having the center cell deflect like 18 inches back from a non kill line was well worth an hour of sewing.

Maybe he's referring to it tangling in your lines while under canopy?

[hjumper33 0]

Is this a problem people are commonly having? Ive jumped this type of bridle for about 5 years and have literally never had that happen once.

[wstcstcmtr 0]

I have a VC1 also, I emailed squirrel and Mike suggested a 150. Let me know how the 170 fits!

What canopy are you using in the Curv now? Do you plan on swapping canopies depending on what kind of jumping you want to do?

[strife 0]

Lucky enough to have a few rigs so wont need to swap. From the looks 150 is a no brainer, went the 170 to keep within the WL range, so hoping it fits the VC1 else will throw it in a vector 348

[wstcstcmtr 0]

Nice. Right now I have 2 rigs also, but if I can get a 150 (or maybe a 170) I can just swap out canopies based on need and I can sell/trade my second rig for some paragliding gear.

So, let us know!

[strife 0]

Will do just received the orders status that it will be completed on 3 jan so prob get to me mid January

[hjumper33 0]

So got a couple jumps on this canopy and I LOVE it. Basically opened directly on heading in a comfortable but not snively manner. The only think I can relate it to is a soft base opening. I was very pleasantly surprised with the flare as this was my biggest concern with the canopy being ultralight F111. Havent had a chance to swoop it yet, but will see how it goes. As it says on the video, this is not an ultra high performance canopy, so the turn rate is not super high with toggle turns, but not a bus by any means. Front riser pressure is soft at the beginning but builds with speed. I was able to pull the dive loop to my shoulder level and hold it there for about a 720. When I received the canopy, I thought that the brake lines seemed a little too long, but the factor setting were actually perfect.

I had gotten to the point where I was using a bunch of special techniques before deployment and was scared of what could happen every time I threw out my pilot chute. Its going to take a little while for those fears to go away, but to be able to just pitch out of full flight again and have a nice consistent opening is very exciting.