Downsize From 170 To 150 Advice!!!

[chriscchristoph 0]

So I want to ask for your advise here. I have a 170 pilot right now and I move between 170-180 lbs so my wingloading is around 1.2 at 85 jumps.

I know that this answer is going to be different for everyone because learning curves and capabilities are different with every jumper, but when do you think the time would be appropriate for me to downsize to a 150 leaving me around a 1.3 wingloading?

Reasoning is that a 150 would be much easier to fit in my container (which is TIGHT at 170) as far as me packing would go, and I personally feel fairly confident with the downsize. But I know my knowledge or "feeling" isnt reliable enough to make the move.

http://www.parachuteshop.com/wing_loading.htm
This link suggests 101-200 jumps for 1.3 WL, but I wanted to hear what yall think as well. Thanks in advance guys!

[mcstain 0]

Downsizing because your container is too small doesn't sound like an ideal justification. Can you check off all of the skills from this article for your current canopy? http://www.dropzone.com/safety/Canopy_Control/Downsizing_Checklist_47.html

I'm not going to pretend that I have any expertise in this area, but I've been told that you should have totally mastered your current canopy before even considering downsizing.

Have you done a canopy course before? If you get the chance, you could take part in a canopy course and let the coach know that you're considering downsizing. They could then assess your skills and provided tailored training for your situation.

Just some ideas!

[chriscchristoph 0]

I feel confident with all of those skills on my current canopy besides the flat turns at 50ft, never tried them. Im taking the canopy course next month and will definitely let the instructor know.

I know for certain I wouldnt down size right this instant, just more curious as to what jump number people typically downsize to a 1.3 WL at. And yes, the packing isnt the best reasoning but damn I hate paying $6 every jump. appreciate the reply mcstain

[councilman24 37]

Anything 150 or less is considered a high performance canopy. Learn how to pack. Jump the crap out of what you have and talk to us in 200 jumps.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[JeffCa 0]

chriscchristoph

I have a 170 pilot right now

No, you don't.

http://www.flyaerodyne.com/pilot.asp

"So many fatalities and injuries are caused by decisions jumpers make before even getting into the aircraft. Skydiving can be safe AND fun at the same time...Honest." - Bill Booth

[chriscchristoph 0]

JeffCa

***I have a 170 pilot right now

No, you don't.

http://www.flyaerodyne.com/pilot.asp

168, calm down.

[johnG325 0]

Haha Jeff! Awesome! Someone was going to get that, sooner or later. Learn to pack, learn to fly.

[Di0 2]

WL is only half of the picture.
It's a good indicator but it's not all.

You have two ways of increasing the WL: either reduce the wing area, or increase the weight.
Now, here's the trick: at the same WL a smaller canopy be more performing in turns, i.e. less forgiving. This offset increases as the canopy sizes get smaller.
That means that that table is not "wrong" but a 100-jumps jumper with 1.3 WL on a 190, for example, might be fine.
A 1.3WL on the exact canopy type but on a 135 (so for a much smaller jumper) will result in higher performances.

The smaller the canopy, the more performance you get, at equivalent WL.


The questions I'd ask myself are: am I really bored with my actual canopy or it's just cool this way?
But also I've been through enough shit, mistakes and fuck-ups and handled them well enough that I can consider something that turns and glides faster? For example, have I been cut at the last moment in the pattern? Was my reaction at that point appropriate or I got away with it out of pure luck? Be honest? Did I instinctively go on brake turns or toggle whip?
Have I landed off in a backyard? Am I more than comfortable with downwinds, riser landings? Have I dug myself out of an involuntary low turn because, simply put, I fucked up?
It's not the drills in the list that you try on purpose, anybody can do those, it's when stuff goes wrong and you don't expect it that you'll understand if your in sync with your canopy or not. You will understand if they are ingrained in your brain and part of an automatic mechanism or something that starts to break down when things happen unexpectedly and fast.
I know that I still have a lot of work to do on mine, for example, and I won't touch a smaller canopy with a 6 feet long pole right now.
I can brake turn my canopy with minimal loss altitude all day long, if I want to, unfortunately my reflexes and "default responses" are still not so automatic and well tuned to do it under stress all the times at the right time.

Because it doesn't matter if you're good or bad, but mistakes will happen, you'll turn lower than you thought, you'll be cut in the pattern no matter how careful you are, you'll land off at some point and you'll have to squeeze yourself between a fence, a car and a powerline. You don't want any of these things to happen, but they migt, they will and then what canopy do you want? One that you know or one that you don't know?
Have I obtained every inch of performance from my canopy that I can get? Have I got professional coaching on it and the coach actually said that yes, I might be ready for something a bit sportier?

All things that I would go through on a bigger canopy before thinking of a smaller one. I'd try to be honest with myself.
The bottom line is: if your actual canopy is still fun, challenging and -more important- has many unknown to you, why getting into something else that would increase the danger without really increasing the fun that you haven't got on the bigger canopy, yet. Yes, you feel confident, yes, you'd PROBABLY be fine, but if you already have fun, why introducing that "probably", know that now you ARE fine?

The way I see it is not all about the numbers, the 1.2, the 1.3, the 150 VS 168, that's all cock measuring contest in the locker room, at our experience level. Personally I think that it's way over my head, I don't have enough experience with different gear, different canopies, different setups, different conditions to tell you what is going to change what and how.
But I know this: as long as you enjoy your flight, you enjoy your canopy, you handle winds well enough to jump regularly, you have fun with it and you feel safe, why rushing?

Most important, don't base your decision on your "feelings", ask a canopy coach or an instructor, take a canopy class on your canopy. Base your decisions on a person with enough experience to steer you in the right direction, it's their job.

In the meanwhile, if closing the container is hard, get a power tool, that'll help, will be cheaper and will keep you safer.

My 2c.

I'm standing on the edge
With a vision in my head
My body screams release me
My dreams they must be fed... You're in flight.

[JeffCa 0]

chriscchristoph

so my wingloading is around 1.2 at 85 jumps.


Reasoning is that a 150 would be much easier to fit in my container (which is TIGHT at 170) as far as me packing would go...

I got my Pilot 188 brand new, with a brand new container. Had a really tough time getting it to fit. I thought about a downsize. I asked my rigger if everything was the correct size and if the closing loop was the right length, and he told me that it was. I kept at it, and now at 152 jumps, the closing loop fits better (room to spare) and the rig looks cleaner when it's packed up. I got better at packing and it revealed that the problem was me. Don't give up so early. Was your rig sized for the container? Have you asked a skilled packer/rigger to pack it and see what they think? Take the advice of others here and learn to pack. That's not meant to be a biting insult, but it's naive to think that you are as good as you're going to get so early in your skydiving journey. Downsizing and possibly breaking yourself, to avoid learning to pack better, is not wise.

Also, not sure why you felt the need to change the number to 170, but you can talk to us like we know what we're talking about. We can all handle 3-digit numbers.

"So many fatalities and injuries are caused by decisions jumpers make before even getting into the aircraft. Skydiving can be safe AND fun at the same time...Honest." - Bill Booth

[mattjw916 2]

I bet a bigger container is cheaper than your annual medical insurance deductible...

NSCR-2376, SCR-15080

[chriscchristoph 0]

I purchased the rig to be tight at 170, 168 for those who it bothers lol, intentionally so I wouldnt have to purchase another container later on after downsizing possibly twice. With that being said its difficult to get in the bag especially with the dbag mirage has, its a little narrow at the mouth. I guess I said 170 to put a general number for what i assumed was a general question, Idk but those 2 square feet are far aside from the question at hand. The packers at my DZ would testify that its far from an easy pack and that it would take some serious time to learn to get it in bag, my only issue is gettin that bastard in the bag everything else im able to do. Alot of good advice, alot of stuff I didnt consider. Like I said before though, no need to be worried about me downsizing immediately, I just wanted to know about how many jumps people had at 1.3 and that was answered pretty well.

[DHemer 0]

All signs point to this being a bad idea, your bones will thank you later.

For what it is worth is your 168 regular zp or zpx? You could always change the main to one that packs smaller removing the tight fit you currently have.

I have a 168 zpx in a container sized for a 170 main and have no issues getting it in with my shitty packing. Results obviously depend on container because if yours is a 150 its going to be tight

[JeffCa 0]

chriscchristoph

I purchased the rig to be tight at 170, 168 for those who it bothers lol, intentionally so I wouldnt have to purchase another container later on after downsizing possibly twice. With that being said its difficult to get in the bag especially with the dbag mirage has, its a little narrow at the mouth. I guess I said 170 to put a general number for what i assumed was a general question, Idk but those 2 square feet are far aside from the question at hand. The packers at my DZ would testify that its far from an easy pack and that it would take some serious time to learn to get it in bag, my only issue is gettin that bastard in the bag everything else im able to do. Alot of good advice, alot of stuff I didnt consider. Like I said before though, no need to be worried about me downsizing immediately, I just wanted to know about how many jumps people had at 1.3 and that was answered pretty well.

I'm still on WL

If I recall, different canopy manufacturers measure their sizes differently, and have been unable to agree on a standard method. So the 168 might be a 170 by somebody else's standard, I don't know.

"So many fatalities and injuries are caused by decisions jumpers make before even getting into the aircraft. Skydiving can be safe AND fun at the same time...Honest." - Bill Booth

[monkycndo 0]

Pilots are know to pack larger compared to canopies of similar size. You could go to a ZPX Pilot, a Pulse or a 7 cell that should fit much more easily into your container. Down sizing because you bought a container that doesn't hold your current main is a less than intelligent reason to go smaller.

Your current WL of 1.2:1 at 180# is aggressive to begin with at 85 jumps. Going to a 150 would put you at 1.36:1 That is way outside of any recommendations.

A tight main also makes your reserve fit tighter as well. A proper fit on the reserve makes it deploy as designed. So that tight main you have been forcing into your "buy one container for future downsizing" has been adding unnecessary risk in case you had to use your reserve.

Many folks have down sized too early and got away with it. But those that haven't have had to pay a heavy price.

Question. How much is your intact body/life worth compared to the container/main you bought?

50 donations so far. Give it a try.

You know you want to spank it
Jump an Infinity

[mr2mk1g 10]

Learn to pack.

[Deimian 43]

I don't know if you tried it, but the reverse S folding method did wonders for me. Much easier to pack now. It still takes more time than others, but it is not like wrestling anymore.

[Joellercoaster 6]

It's good that you are asking these questions. The answers might be a little surprising - I'm not suggesting you are foolish (the fact that you ask is a good sign) but you should understand you are already in risky territory.

chriscchristoph

my wingloading is around 1.2 at 85 jumps.

I know that this answer is going to be different for everyone because learning curves and capabilities are different with every jumper

This is the standard get-out clause used by every person who ever jumped a canopy that is too small for their experience, ever.

The good news is that the most common formal chart you will see on the net actually has a section (marked 'smallest allowed') for the top end of the talented kids, who are getting coaching and jumping very regularly. Assuming for the moment that you are one of those people, then the very smallest canopy you should be on right now is somewhere above 180 square feet in size.

If you are not one of these blessed talents (and I sure ain't), then the answer is more like 210.

Back to the 150 question, since that's what you asked: the very earliest point for someone with an exit weight of 198* is 240 jumps (340 for most people though).

Bummer that your canopy is so hard to pack, but hang in there. You will master it.

[edit: * = weigh yourself in full gear. You will be surprised at what your real exit weight is (I know I was), I suspect your estimate is a bit on the low side.]

--
"I'll tell you how all skydivers are judged, . They are judged by the laws of physics." - kkeenan

"You jump out, pull the string and either live or die. What's there to be good at?

[davjohns 1]

Not sure what you are calling the most common chart. I just looked one up out of interest. I found it pretty conservative compared to my experiences with different canopies. Conservative is good. I just think there are more factors to consider than the X/Y chart allows for.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[Southern_Man 0]

chriscchristoph

Reasoning is that a 150 would be much easier to fit in my container (which is TIGHT at 170) as far as me packing would go,

Worst reasoning ever.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[chriscchristoph 0]

Seems there is a pretty large consensus that my jump numbers are nowhere near where they need to be. I appreciate all the advice. I kinda knew that would be too aggressive of a move for now but that chart I posted earlier made it seem like I wasnt too far off, http://www.parachuteshop.com/wing_loading.htm . But as ive read there is obviously more than that chart to consider.

[mr2mk1g 10]

That's not the only chart out there, most manufacturers have them, some canopy specific, as do many national bodies – some are very complicated zone type charts factoring in planform as well as pure loading. You calculate your exit weight to be about 205lb giving you a wing loading of about 1.2:1 on your current canopy and perhaps 1.35:1 on a 150.

For the canopy you currently jump, the manufacturer says a 1.3 wing loading is in the "advanced" category: http://www.flyaerodyne.com/pilotsel.asp

For the comparable canopy from PD, (a Sabre 2) they would put your exit weight at somewhere between "experienced" (that's a category above "advanced" in their system) and "max" on a 150: http://www.performancedesigns.com/sabre2.asp

Icarus give generic advice and put a wing loading of 1.3 into their 4th category "high performance": http://www.icaruscanopies.aero/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7&Itemid=653

Brian Germain (another manufacturer and canopy flight instructor) suggests most people with your experience and exit weight should be on a canopy of about 230 square foot and certainly no lower than about a 190: http://www.bigairsportz.com/pdf/bas-sizingchart.pdf

The SIM suggests 1.2 max wing loading until D licence: http://www.uspa.org/SIM/Read/Section5/tabid/168/Default.aspx

I gave up looking for national body charts but most are available on here somewhere via the search function.

[Yanni 0]

Although the downsizing checklist is a great start in deciding weather you are ready to bump down a size I don't think it's enough. My biggest issue with downsizing is being able to safely navigate slower canopies flying erratic landing patterns. In a perfect world there is plenty of vertical separation and flight paths are predictable but this is not always the case. When you find yourself with 20 jumpers bunched up trying to land at the same time is when you might be glad you where still at a lighter wing loading.

If your main is not already low bulk find one that is and stay with the same size.

Door! Green! Enjoy

[Grumpy 9]

Have you tried the Psycho Pack method? It's good at getting all the air out of a newer ZP canopy and should allow your existing canopy to pack smaller.
Google it for instructional videos if there's nobody at your dz who can give you a demo.

[DocPop 1]

I started off jumping a 200 as a student then downsized as recommended (size by size) and am currently jumping a 103.

The transition from SA2 170 to SA2 150 felt like the second biggest change I have ever made (the biggest was moving from a SA2 150 to a Katana 135, but that was a downsize plus a change to a much more aggressive canopy type).

IMO you need to be super-comfortable and practiced in all basic canopy skills (including flat-turns, flare turns, stalls, slow flight mode etc..) on your 170 before considering a downsize.

"The ground does not care who you are. It will always be tougher than the human behind the controls."

~ CanuckInUSA

[iwanttofly 0]

I think that it is a terrible idea to downsize because of canopy being a tight fit. Practice packing, practice canopy control, 300 jumps later go smaller. I use to hate packing, I could never get my canopy inside of the bag, now I enjoy it. I mean I really do ENJOY IT. It resets my mind. Less jumps per day than using packers but there is something about packing your own chute. I use to practice at home on rainy days with A/C blowing, listening to some good music. F this, F that turned into whoossa. DO NOT downsize, please. It sucks to watch people getting hurt for stupid reasons.
Your chart is not the most common one anyways. Look at this one instead
http://www.bigairsportz.com/pdf/bas-sizingchart.pdf