Round Reserves

[riggerrob 643]

If I gave a round reserve to a student, it would make me a hypocrite.
I may have started with round mains and reserves - back in 1977 - but I believe it cruel to subject modern student to that sort of abuse.
I have less than 100 jumps on round mains, but well over 4,000 jumps on square mains.
I may have deployed 3 round reserves, but the last story illustrates my point the best.
The year was 1986, a few months after my last jump with a (West German Army) round main. I was test jumping a 300 square foot main. We took the spot long because of strong winds. The main opened in a spin. I took one look at it and started peeling my cutaway handle .... The next thing I knew, I was hanging under a small round reserve, over a huge swamp. Between me and the DZ were: a swamp, a small river, a tiny pasture, a road, train tracks, fences, wires and a row of hangars.
All the others landed on the DZ, but I elected to follow my main into a tiny clearing in the swamp. It took me a other half-hour to wade through the swamp "Tarzan" across a 2 meter wide stream, etc. to get back to the (German) DZ.
When I returned the equipment to its owner, he asked me if I had seen any police ......
"No. Why?"
"Because you landed in France! Hah! Hah!"

Now try telling your students that rounds are better than squares.

[justinb138 0]

Quote

Quote

because I'd rather be going down under a round reserve. if your under a square your going downwind and it will hurt (maybe not because your knocked out) if you hit an obstacle.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I still believe that you are better off landing a large (i.e. 250 square foot) reserve - with the brakes stowed - than any round reserve.
Hint, I worked on all phases of TSO testing for the P124A/Aviator pilot emergency parachute system containing 290 square foot, ram air canopies. On several occasions, I landed them down-wind, in the toolees, with my hands off the controls. All those landings were softer than rounds.
But what have I learned after 28 years .. well over 4,300 jumps, etc.

Any idea what the difference in descent rates between an equally loaded Tempo 250 and a commonly used round reserve would be?

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

Do you know where I can buy a slightly-used PZ-81 for cheap?

You can try East-Europe or Russia. I'm not sure if you can find air-worthy ones.

BTW they have a bad reputation, because a 2 out where PZ-81 is one of them is really bad. A triangular is not flying nicely together with a square. They kill each other. Some experienced got more experienced trying it. There is a really strong "CUT THE MAIN AWAY" in the manual. It does not have a free-bag. It does not glide as good as a square and not as reliable than a square, but its an airfoil and it can be flared.

[IanHarrop 41]

try this site...

http://www.zavod3.ru/catalogue.html?level=position§ion=1&subsection=7&position=10&nls=2

Interestingly they say:

This reserve chest-type manually-deployed parachute system is specifically intended for use in conjunction with malfunctioned ram-air main canopies that were not jettisoned for some reason as well as after successful cutaways.

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[NWPoul 1]

Quote

Quote

Come on!

It's 2005. Round reserve in sport is only for pilot bail out rig.

I had 3 rides on PZ-81, a triangular reserve. I would rather choose that than a round reserve.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Do you know where I can buy a slightly-used PZ-81 for cheap?
Hee!
Hee!
I have a few jumps on Delta 2 and Paradactyl and would like to keep a Rogallo canopy around for novelty jumps.
Note: I trust Rogallos more than I trust rounds.

Yes you can find PZ-81 in Russia
Here you can post your request
Edit to add the link: http://www.dropzone.ru/board/index.php?catid=14&set_add_ad_cat=
(if you know russian:) if you don't but have a strong interest of PZ-81 - PM me)

two current classifieds post:

http://www.dropzone.ru/board/detail.php?siteid=1838 - Almost out of date (12 years) reserve with 2 ride for ~70$

http://www.dropzone.ru/board/detail.php?siteid=1511
1999 DOM with 0 rides

Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

Yes you can find PZ-81 in Russia
Here you can post your request (if you know russian:) if you don't but have a strong interest of PZ-81 - PM me)

two current classifieds post:

http://www.dropzone.ru/board/detail.php?siteid=1838 - Almost out of date (12 years) reserve with 2 ride for ~70$

http://www.dropzone.ru/board/detail.php?siteid=1511
1999 DOM with 0 rides

And how can he use it in USA? I doubt that PZ-81 has TSO.

[wmw999 2,444]

He can use it as a main canopy without needing a TSO.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[NWPoul 1]

Quote

And how can he use it in USA? I doubt that PZ-81 has TSO.

As he wish to:) (Probably if he want it he know why) :).

Why drink and drive, if you can smoke and fly?

[IanHarrop 41]

No TSO required on main is the real answer but also...

He's Canadian - living in Canada

"Where troubles melt like lemon drops, away above the chimney tops, that's where you'll find me" Dorothy

[teason 0]

TSO? Canadians don't need no stinkin' TSO!

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[riggerrob 643]

Ian is correct, Canadian riggers are not limited by TSOs.
A Canadian rigger can pack any reserve that is approved/certified/TSOed in its country of origin, provided he has the manual and is approved by CSPA to pack that type of reserve: round, square, one-pin sport, two-pin sport, Pop-Top, chest or pilot emergency parachute.

However that is just an argument over trivialities as I never intend on stuffing a Rogallo PZ-81 into a reserve container. It will be far more fun to fly as a main. ... just like I did with Delta 2 and Paradactyl, back in my ill-spent youth.
Hee!
Hee!

[phoenixlpr 0]

I've missed it too. Of course if will used as a main. No freebag, pure fun.

[CReWLL 0]

A round is sound, but a square wil get you there, as the saying went.
Bad body posision = round
2 canopies = round
injured or unconcious = round
downwind = round
normal reserve ride (99%) = square

[riggerrob 643]

Any idea what the difference in descent rates between an equally loaded Tempo 250 and a commonly used round reserve would be?

[ripcord4 0]

Quote

Quote

I'd welcome opinions from senior/master riggers with 20+ years in the sport on which reserve has more reliable openings in very unstable body positions, square or round?

Will 15 years do?

IMO a round with a mesh skirt and a full stowage diaper, (not type one deployment). That said I wouldn't choose to jump a round again

35 years as a rigger....unstable reserve deployment...I'll take a round reserve everytime.Rounds open every time...squares open most of the time.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

....unstable reserve deployment...Rounds open every time...

Quote

Bullshit!

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[teason 0]

Bad body position ... sounds like a student.
2 canopies out ... usually a student
the other 1% of the reserves rides ... more hazardous with less experience.

Sometimes the best choice is not always the best choice, especially with students.
A strong opinion is usally the sign of a closed mind and when we choose what to train students on, when we choose what is the best choice, we can't base our choices on hubris.

I've been reading this thread with great interest and have noticed that some make those choices by weighing the pros and cons of each.

Others just claim to be right and refuse to believe that thier system has a downside.

Here are the factors:
1.) landing area
2.) AADs
3.) container system
4.) personal perspective of training techniques
5.) personal views of students under stress and how the react
6.) past experiences (seen some scary &^$&*)
7.) ah .. a bunch more that I can't think of on the wrong side of midnight

These are the factors, not wrong thinking because you disagree with others, not cheapness of the DZO and not arrogance that comes from thinking you have to always be right.

p.s. I'm still on the fence with my views (having been very pro round for years) and appreciate those who have made good points.

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[mark 107]

Quote

Rounds open every time.

I have seen a diaper-deployed round reserve open with a full inversion, then landed safely. Does that prove or disprove your point?

Mark

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

Quote

Rounds open every time.

I have seen a diaper-deployed round reserve open with a full inversion, then landed safely. Does that prove or disprove your point?

Mark

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I have destroyed a couple of military round canopies by inverting them.
The first was a Canadian Army Military Freefall rig (circa 1981) it had a sleeve-deployed T-10 that opened so hard I could not straighten my neck for four days! When I finally did look up, the sleeve and pilot chutes were hanging inside the canopy and the steering vents were at the front. A pull on the left toggle turned me right, etc. A closer inspection revealed dozens of small holes, not large enough to break bones, but far too expensive to repair.
The second time I destroyed a military round was a West German Army (un-netted) static-line, T-10 jump from a Huey. That T-10 opened right side out, but with dozens of small holes, none big enough to break bones, but far too expensive to repair.

I have also seen a couple of (Type 2/2 stow) diapered Niagara Parachutes (eddie Grimm) Baby Cobras (copy of Strong 26 foot LoPo) reserves totally invert. Both jumpers landed fine, but didn't trust their round reserves any more.

[ripcord4 0]

Quote

Quote

Rounds open every time.

I have seen a diaper-deployed round reserve open with a full inversion, then landed safely. Does that prove or disprove your point?

Mark

YES