New Canopy - Sub-terminal or Terminal First Use?

[jim_32766 0]

I have heard a couple of differing opinions on how to treat a brand new canopy on first jump. Some have said that a sub-terminal opening is best to "set" the lines. Others have said that is total BS and it's fine to do a normal jump and terminal opening. Which is right?

The meaning of life . . . is to make life have meaning.

[AggieDave 6]

Take a deep breath, just go jump.

Although I do recommend a solo hop-n-pop to give you the chance to practice some flares, a couple of stalls, flat turns and a chance to fly the pattern well with out interference.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[brettski74 0]

Whenever I jump gear that is new to me, I try to open a little higher if at all possible so I have some extra time and altitude to play with the different inputs, figure out the stall point, how it turns, dives, etc. You would do well to do the same.

As for the terminal vs sub-terminal opening, I'm no rigger, but it sounds like bullshit to me. Have you asked a rigger for his/her opinion, or is this just from the peanut gallery around the bonfire?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

I have heard a couple of differing opinions on how to treat a brand new canopy on first jump. Some have said that a sub-terminal opening is best to "set" the lines. Others have said that is total BS and it's fine to do a normal jump and terminal opening. Which is right?

So what's the harm in doing a sub-terminal jump first?

Do a high hop n' pop, so that if there IS something wrong with it, you've got more time to deal with it.

It's not unheard of for things to be wrong, straight from the factory. Like finger-trapped line cascades not being sewn down. Do you want those to pop out at 120 mph and 2,500 feet, or would you rather it happen at 60 mph and 5,000 feet?

[pchapman 279]

That idea of 'taking it easy' on a canopy the first time has been around.

We don't really give our reserve canopies that choice, do we?

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

That idea of 'taking it easy' on a canopy the first time has been around.
We don't really give our reserve canopies that choice, do we?

If you cut-away and deploy quickly enough, like with an RSL, we do.

[tetra316 0]

So what's the harm in taking it to terminal then?

You can still open higher but not right out the door.

[tetra316 0]

Quote

Quote

That idea of 'taking it easy' on a canopy the first time has been around.
We don't really give our reserve canopies that choice, do we?

If you cut-away and deploy quickly enough, like with an RSL, we do.

If you have a hard pull or no pull then there is no chance.

I'm inclined to think the whole "setting" the line is BS. If they are installed correctly, they shouldn't need to be "set".

[airtwardo 7]

Parachutes have souls, if you baby it when it's new it's gonna thing you're a pussy and it'll never behave the way ya want it to!


~ like with any new toy...break it in how yer gonna use it!

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[Slurp56 0]

Quote

Quote

I have heard a couple of differing opinions on how to treat a brand new canopy on first jump. Some have said that a sub-terminal opening is best to "set" the lines. Others have said that is total BS and it's fine to do a normal jump and terminal opening. Which is right?

So what's the harm in doing a sub-terminal jump first?

Do a high hop n' pop, so that if there IS something wrong with it, you've got more time to deal with it.

It's not unheard of for things to be wrong, straight from the factory. Like finger-trapped line cascades not being sewn down. Do you want those to pop out at 120 mph and 2,500 feet, or would you rather it happen at 60 mph and 5,000 feet?

Or you could just inspect any new piece of gear before jumping it so that you dont have to wonder if the finger-trapped cascades (or any other manufacturing process) are going to hold together.

________________________________________
I have proof-read this post 500 times, but I guarantee you'll still manage to find a flaw.

[Jbag 0]

inspect then go terminal, never heard of "setting the lines" them shits will "set" on their own after a few jumps.

IHYD

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

Quote

That idea of 'taking it easy' on a canopy the first time has been around.
We don't really give our reserve canopies that choice, do we?

If you cut-away and deploy quickly enough, like with an RSL, we do.

If you have a hard pull or no pull then there is no chance.

If you have an RSL, skyhook or a normal manual pull, you should have the reserve open before you reach terminal velocity. In fact, I would say that the large majority of reserve deployments are sub-terminal.

It takes 12 seconds to reach terminal velocity. If you wait that long after a cut-away before pulling your reserve, that's too long, and you're probably VERY close to the ground.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Or you could just inspect any new piece of gear before jumping it so that you dont have to wonder if the finger-trapped cascades (or any other manufacturing process) are going to hold together.

One problem with those is that the zig-zag stitch can be so wide that it skips over the inside finger-trapped line on both sides, and never actually penetrates it to lock it in place. So the stitching is there and it looks fairly correct. The only problem is that when force is applied, like on opening shock, it can slip right out from under the stitching. A lot of new canopy purchasers don't have a clue about those kinds of things to even look for them...

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

inspect then go terminal, never heard of "setting the lines" them shits will "set" on their own after a few jumps.

So says the guy with only 3 years in the sport. I would imagine there are a whole bunch of things you've never heard of. That doesn't mean that everything you've never heard of is untrue.

[zxcvb 0]

Quote

One problem with those is that the zig-zag stitch can be so wide that it skips over the inside finger-trapped line on both sides, and never actually penetrates it to lock it in place. So the stitching is there and it looks fairly correct. The only problem is that when force is applied, like on opening shock, it can slip right out from under the stitching.

The problem with your theory is fingertrapped lines hold when loaded, they slip out when unloaded.

Quote

don't have a clue about those kinds of things

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Quote

One problem with those is that the zig-zag stitch can be so wide that it skips over the inside finger-trapped line on both sides, and never actually penetrates it to lock it in place. So the stitching is there and it looks fairly correct. The only problem is that when force is applied, like on opening shock, it can slip right out from under the stitching.

The problem with your theory is fingertrapped lines hold when loaded, they slip out when unloaded.

Ah yes, another guy who's only been around for a short while. Do you really have over 3,000 jumps in only 4 years? With that many jumps, how come you only have a C license? Your credentials are questionable. Regardless, because of your relatively short time in sport, you wouldn't remember that service bulletin that was issued before your time about this very situation. Lines which are finger-trapped at the cascades only have a couple of inches of overlap - that's not a lot of holding power on it's own. Try it sometime. And like you say, they can slip loose when unloaded, like during packing, so that maybe even less overlap is in play at the time of deployment.

Lines not stitched down properly? Not to worry!

Note: I'm not really arguing that "set" jumps are necessary. I'm just arguing against a lot of misconceptions that are popping up as a result of this discussion, like:

- Most reserve deployments are at terminal velocity.
- Unstitched finger-trap line joints are nothing to worry about.
- "I've never heard of it in my short time in the sport, therefore it's nothing to be concerned about."
- A visual inspection will catch all flaws in construction.

[zxcvb 0]

Quote

Do you really have over 3,000 jumps in only 4 years?

Since we are playing that game, do you really only have only 5000 jumps in 30 years? I know people like you, you would rather talk about how you are a skydiver than go skydiving. Let me guess, you are at the DZ every weekend but only do 2-3 jumps before you get too "thirsty" to jump.

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

Quote

Do you really have over 3,000 jumps in only 4 years?

Since we are playing that game, do you really only have only 5000 jumps in 30 years? I know people like you, you would rather talk about how you are a skydiver than go skydiving. Let me guess, you are at the DZ every weekend but only do 2-3 jumps before you get too "thirsty" to jump.

Heck he's got more jumps than I do, and I've been doing it longer!

If you're averaging 800 jumps a year that is indeed quite impressive...in the minute sub-culure that is the world of skydiving.

But for some of us, rumor has it that there a big world out there and more than one same song on the jukebox worth dancing to.


My 100 jump a year average for the past 35 years merely a chapter in my life, I'd hate for my participation in a hobby, to be the whole book!

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[tetra316 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

That idea of 'taking it easy' on a canopy the first time has been around.
We don't really give our reserve canopies that choice, do we?

If you cut-away and deploy quickly enough, like with an RSL, we do.

If you have a hard pull or no pull then there is no chance.

If you have an RSL, skyhook or a normal manual pull, you should have the reserve open before you reach terminal velocity. In fact, I would say that the large majority of reserve deployments are sub-terminal.

It takes 12 seconds to reach terminal velocity. If you wait that long after a cut-away before pulling your reserve, that's too long, and you're probably VERY close to the ground.

A hard pull or no pull implies you are not cutting away before deploying your reserve. There is nothing to cutaway and you are already at terminal.

As to the frequency of terminal versus subterminal reserve deployments, yes subterminal is probably more common but what about all the terminal ones. You have no chance to "set" your reserve before use. And yet I've never heard of a manufacturer advising a subterminal jump on a reserve to break it in. That is why I think the whole "set" your lines theory is BS.

[phoenixlpr 0]

Quote

I have heard a couple of differing opinions on how to treat a brand new canopy on first jump. Some have said that a sub-terminal opening is best to "set" the lines. Others have said that is total BS and it's fine to do a normal jump and terminal opening. Which is right?

This is a valid question. I read some instruction in some Performance Variable/ (Fly?)FireBird's canopies because the fabric is still streching by use to the final shape or whatever...

I have not read about that thin in any canopy manual.
I'd just go ahead and jump them and start with having someing 8-10sec delay on some high opening(1500m+).

[erdnarob 1]

When possible, I always make the first jump on a canopy with a sub terminal delay (6-8 seconds). Even if the canopy has been checked at quality control, error is human and it seems to me that if there is a error, opening at sub terminal will make the opening force weaker with less consequences.
Everything new: cars, airplanes, boats...are normally used the first time not at full capacity or speed. Better safe than sorry.

Learn from others mistakes, you will never live long enough to make them all.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

do you really only have only 5000 jumps in 30 years?

That's about right. So? Along the way I was married for 20 years, went to college, and raised two sons. Those things kind of slow down your jumping a bit. Some years I've made 400 jumps, other years only 150. But I've been doing it continuously that entire time. The longest I've ever been without a jump in 32 years is about a month, during long streaks of bad winter weather.

And the subject we're discussing is time in sport, and the body of knowledge that goes along with that, so I've still got you beat by far, in both categories.

Quote

I know people like you, you would rather talk about how you are a skydiver than go skydiving. Let me guess, you are at the DZ every weekend but only do 2-3 jumps before you get too "thirsty" to jump.

Incorrect.

I'm also not afraid to post my real name and be known personally for what I say here. How about you? Let's see; fake name (first five letters on the bottom-left row of the keyboard), no home drop zone listed, not even a city or country, suspicious credentials claimed...

Your claimed C-license number, C-22432, was listed in the May, 1993 "Parachutist" as being issued to Winston McCall, of Alabama. Is that you? But that was 17 years ago, so once again that doesn't jive with your claimed time-in-sport of four years on your profile here. What gives?

[brettski74 0]

Quote

When possible, I always make the first jump on a canopy with a sub terminal delay (6-8 seconds). Even if the canopy has been checked at quality control, error is human and it seems to me that if there is a error, opening at sub terminal will make the opening force weaker with less consequences.

Is there any data or manufacturers recommendations to back that up? I went looking through the manual from my Sabre2 but I couldn't find anything that suggested I should do any number of sub-terminal jumps before taking it terminal, although it's possible that it was somewhere else that I didn't look.

I'm also not convinced by this idea that a sub-terminal opening will have fewer or better consequences should something on the canopy be sub-standard. The way I'm looking at it is that if something is going to fail on the canopy, I'd like it to do so as high as possible. If a terminal opening is more likely to make the canopy fail due to faults in it's construction, then I'd rather that happen at opening. Maybe a sub-terminal opening won't break that line attachment completely, but maybe it might tear out enough of the stitching or pull the finger trap through enough of the way that it slowly deteriorates throughout the stresses of turns, and stalls in flight, finally failing as you turn onto final. Of course, maybe a terminal opening could do that, too. I'm merely trying to point out that at least the possibility exists that a sub-terminal opening could produce more dangerous consequences as a result of lowered stresses at opening time.

As for me, next time I buy a new canopy, I'll ask the manufacturer for their recommendations regarding breaking in a new canopy and then I'll do what they suggest. I'd suggest that the OP do the same.

[jim_32766 0]

Quote

As for me, next time I buy a new canopy, I'll ask the manufacturer for their recommendations regarding breaking in a new canopy and then I'll do what they suggest. I'd suggest that the OP do the same.

The OP actually did that prior to posting. The answer was not completely crisp. It went something like, " . . . you don't really need to do that with a new canopy, but any time I jump a new canopy I always do a hop-n-pop."

So I really don't have to -- but that's what they do.

The meaning of life . . . is to make life have meaning.

[Beatnik 2]

Quote

I'm also not convinced by this idea that a sub-terminal opening will have fewer or better consequences should something on the canopy be sub-standard. The way I'm looking at it is that if something is going to fail on the canopy, I'd like it to do so as high as possible. If a terminal opening is more likely to make the canopy fail due to faults in it's construction, then I'd rather that happen at opening. Maybe a sub-terminal opening won't break that line attachment completely, but maybe it might tear out enough of the stitching or pull the finger trap through enough of the way that it slowly deteriorates throughout the stresses of turns, and stalls in flight, finally failing as you turn onto final. Of course, maybe a terminal opening could do that, too. I'm merely trying to point out that at least the possibility exists that a sub-terminal opening could produce more dangerous consequences as a result of lowered stresses at opening time.

You should be a test jumper with that kind of thinking. Having less variables in a equation is always a better option IMHO. The opening/inflation of a parachute is a very violent process in reality. The forces will be higher there than any other time. After that the stress on the parachute components is pretty low and very unlikely that something would happen. Sure it is possible but very unlikely. The materials used in the construction can be pretty resilient and usually can survive many low stress openings and flights prior to breaking/failing, whereas the same cannot be said for high stress situations. This is just my experience talking and the few hundred test jumps I have done.