Squeak 17 #1 August 28, 2003 If you're not really intending doing high performance landings is there any real reason to go eliptical Other than swoop landings and carves, what else are high performance canopies used for.You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #2 August 28, 2003 QuoteIf you're not really intending doing high performance landings is there any real reason to go eliptical Other than swoop landings and carves, what else are high performance canopies used for. You seem to be confusing shape with size. Elliptical does not mean "small arse". As a general rule (to which there are exceptions) elliptical canopies have softer openings, lighter controls, and flatter glides than the same size rectangular canopies with the same loading. They are not necessarily faster than the same size rectangular canopies. A lot depends on how they are trimmed. How they land is only one part of the equation.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #3 August 28, 2003 Crossbraced canopies are barely elliptical anymore. Taper angle has little to do with its ability to swoop...Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #4 August 28, 2003 QuoteQuoteYou seem to be confusing shape with size. Elliptical does not mean "small arse". Sorry I know eliptical doesn't mean small, it's just rare (here anyways) to see elipticals that are greater tnan 135 (I've seen 1 150 Stileto) everyone else that I've seen flying elipticals are flying smaller higher load canopies. As a general rule (to which there are exceptions) elliptical canopies have softer openings, lighter controls, and flatter glides than the same size rectangular canopies with the same loading. They are not necessarily faster than the same size rectangular canopies. A lot depends on how they are trimmed. How they land is only one part of the equation. OK so if they have a flatter glide would they not give better straight in approach landing, given that they would come in on a shallower angle??You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 2,027 #5 August 28, 2003 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou seem to be confusing shape with size. Elliptical does not mean "small arse". Sorry I know eliptical doesn't mean small, it's just rare (here anyways) to see elipticals that are greater tnan 135 (I've seen 1 150 Stileto) everyone else that I've seen flying elipticals are flying smaller higher load canopies. As a general rule (to which there are exceptions) elliptical canopies have softer openings, lighter controls, and flatter glides than the same size rectangular canopies with the same loading. They are not necessarily faster than the same size rectangular canopies. A lot depends on how they are trimmed. How they land is only one part of the equation. OK so if they have a flatter glide would they not give better straight in approach landing, given that they would come in on a shallower angle?? Define "better".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites VectorBoy 0 #6 August 28, 2003 Most canopys are somewhat tapered to fairly eliptical. Sabre 1 s and tri s are pretty darn square or really rectangular. But all of the newer designs are at least a little tapered even canopys for jumpers off of student status. The reason is aerodynamic efficiency. Most aircraft wings are tapered quite a bit, very few are an absolute rectangle. Paragliders have an almost perfect elliptical planform even the student models. The "radicalness" ( for lack of a better word ) of any given high perfarmance canopy or single purpose higher performance crossbraced canopy comes not just from its elliptical shape but from all of its other designs specs. Things like how its center of ballance is located via line lengths or its trim in neutral flight. Inlet shape etc, play an equally important role in how it will open, fly, turn, dive and flare. And the VERY important heavy wing loading that they typically fly at. Load an original sabre that high and you will see some performance, although thats the wrong way to go about it today. And like someone said above the highest performance canopys really aren't that elliptical. So to answer your question in a word its efficiency. The sabre 2 performs better than the orginal and it even flys faster than some canopys that have more taper and are considered higher performance. Many canopys perform different from one another. Try them all keep the one you like the best. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #7 August 28, 2003 QuoteOK so if they have a flatter glide would they not give better straight in approach landing, given that they would come in on a shallower angle?? Define "better". Better as in shallower so that if a student jumper is coming in on a shallower angle the chances of a nail drive smack in (from a steep approach) are dramatically reduced. From what I've heard and read and seen it's easier to walk away from an approach that has planed out (or is shallow to start) than it is to walk away from a steep landing crash? Or is my thinking all arse about?You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,991 #8 August 28, 2003 >Better as in shallower so that if a student jumper is coming in on a > shallower angle the chances of a nail drive smack in (from a steep >approach) are dramatically reduced. If you don't flare, lower vertical speed is your friend, and that's primarily influenced by wing loading i.e. a larger canopy will injure you less. If you do flare, the canopy with the most powerful flare (or, more accurately, the one _you_ can flare better) will give you the safer landing. Flat glide angle is really only an issue in terms of making it back from bad spots in no wind (or light wind) conditions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #9 August 28, 2003 Quote If you don't flare, lower vertical speed is your friend, and that's primarily influenced by wing loading i.e. a larger canopy will injure you less. would this not hold true fo a lightly loaded canopy with a shallow glide angle, would it not also come in slower? Quote If you do flare, the canopy with the most powerful flare (or, more accurately, the one _you_ can flare better) will give you the safer landing. Flat glide angle is really only an issue in terms of making it back from bad spots in no wind (or light wind) conditions. what dictates the "powerful flare" Forward speed isn't it?You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kris 0 #10 August 28, 2003 Quotewhat dictates the "powerful flare" Forward speed isn't it? To steal a line from Quade, that's part of it, in the same way that peanut butter equals sandwich. Many things affect flare but most of it is in the design of the canopy itself.Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites alain 0 #11 August 28, 2003 QuoteBetter as in shallower so that if a student jumper is coming in on a shallower angle the chances of a nail drive smack in (from a steep approach) are dramatically reduced. From what I've heard and read and seen it's easier to walk away from an approach that has planed out (or is shallow to start) than it is to walk away from a steep landing crash? what you describe here (quick planout) refers to the canopy's recovery arc, not to it's glide angle. At equivalent WL some HP canopy (compared to a conservative canopy) have the same glide but a larger recovery arc allowing them to dive longer and to keep the dive speed arround the corner and during the surf. croosfire comes to mind... (others too, that's just an example) Recovery arc varies with the canopy ability to gain some extra speed during diving manoeuvres: shape (aspect ratio, trim, nose shape, drag, ...) but also with wing-loading come into consideration: a conservative canopy with a short recovery arc at 1,1:1 gives a way larger recovery arc at 1,5:1. Tapered shapes were introduced when canopy designers started to increase aspect/ratio because a high aspect/ratio canopy tends to give end cell closures during radical turns (end cell presure issue, I guess) Eliptical is a slightly different thing: the canopy is not only tapered on the end cells but all cells are concerned which appears to give a cleaner shape. (Have a look at Icarus web site: they explain this better than I can do...) One can design a canopy more or less eliptical: the more you give, the higher aspect ratio you can apply => the canopy will become more efficient and radical because of less drag. alain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Tonto 1 #12 August 28, 2003 QuoteOther than swoop landings and carves, what else are high performance canopies used for. Keeping your cutaway drills current. I beleive upwards of 90% of jumpers belong on "squares" or light elipticals. It's all marketing. The real swoopers can swoop any rag. tIt's the year of the Pig. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkymonkeyONE 4 #13 August 28, 2003 Agreed. Seeing the mass, "no landing skill having" majority of participants at the WFFC will even further strengthen that belief. The incredibly vast majority of skydivers out there absolutely do not need a canopy more agressive than a Sabre2. Most people flying canopies more agressive that that have no concept of what their canopy is capable of, yet vanity urges them into "sexier" mains. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites trigger 0 #14 August 28, 2003 I'm sure it's already been said,but a typical questions posed by "Randoms" is ,What canopy/size do you jump as if it matters. Problem is alot of skydivers seem to think is does and would rather answer "that" question with "pocket rocket rather than sky barge,but i will always maintain that you'll look a lot "cooler"under a canopy that you can fly and fly well than one that you can't. That said,it has to be asked what type of canopy flight do you enjoy. Point being that not every HP canopy pilot swoops or even intends to "swoop" but they simply enjoy the type of flight that their HP canopy delivers.i.e.response to toggle input for example..CHOP WOOD COLLECT WATER. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ron 10 #15 August 28, 2003 QuoteAgreed. Seeing the mass, "no landing skill having" majority of participants at the WFFC will even further strengthen that belief. The incredibly vast majority of skydivers out there absolutely do not need a canopy more agressive than a Sabre2. Most people flying canopies more agressive that that have no concept of what their canopy is capable of, yet vanity urges them into "sexier" mains. Chuck Yep, and I wish people would get over it already.... A small main does not make you a better, cooler skydiver. (Or it might, and I'm just bad, and uncool?) Ron"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,991 #16 August 28, 2003 >would this not hold true fo a lightly loaded canopy with a shallow >glide angle, would it not also come in slower? A bit, but going from a Sabre2 135 to a Sabre2 150 has a much greater effect on vertical speed than going from a Sabre2 135 to a Triathalon 135 (which does not have as good a glide angle.) You're better off under the larger canopy if you don't flare. >what dictates the "powerful flare" Forward speed isn't it? Forward speed. Loading. Planform. Brake trim. Wing rigidity. Brake geometry. Trim angle. And most importantly pilot skill. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #17 August 29, 2003 Lucky I'm not actually looking at getting an eliptical for a while yet Iwas just curious as to why most ppl go eliptical and smaller generally at the same time. I would seem (to me at least) more prudent to learn how to fly what you have and then go eliptical at the same wingloading, rather than downsize AND go eliptical. That mentality seems pretty strong here in OzYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Ron 10 #18 August 29, 2003 The answer is simple...people want to be cool. Elliptical and now Xbraced is seen as cool. I wanna be cool I have to have to cool toys. Then the manufactorers say things like "It flies bigger" "You need to really load it to really fly it." All BS."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
kallend 2,027 #5 August 28, 2003 QuoteQuoteQuoteYou seem to be confusing shape with size. Elliptical does not mean "small arse". Sorry I know eliptical doesn't mean small, it's just rare (here anyways) to see elipticals that are greater tnan 135 (I've seen 1 150 Stileto) everyone else that I've seen flying elipticals are flying smaller higher load canopies. As a general rule (to which there are exceptions) elliptical canopies have softer openings, lighter controls, and flatter glides than the same size rectangular canopies with the same loading. They are not necessarily faster than the same size rectangular canopies. A lot depends on how they are trimmed. How they land is only one part of the equation. OK so if they have a flatter glide would they not give better straight in approach landing, given that they would come in on a shallower angle?? Define "better".... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites VectorBoy 0 #6 August 28, 2003 Most canopys are somewhat tapered to fairly eliptical. Sabre 1 s and tri s are pretty darn square or really rectangular. But all of the newer designs are at least a little tapered even canopys for jumpers off of student status. The reason is aerodynamic efficiency. Most aircraft wings are tapered quite a bit, very few are an absolute rectangle. Paragliders have an almost perfect elliptical planform even the student models. The "radicalness" ( for lack of a better word ) of any given high perfarmance canopy or single purpose higher performance crossbraced canopy comes not just from its elliptical shape but from all of its other designs specs. Things like how its center of ballance is located via line lengths or its trim in neutral flight. Inlet shape etc, play an equally important role in how it will open, fly, turn, dive and flare. And the VERY important heavy wing loading that they typically fly at. Load an original sabre that high and you will see some performance, although thats the wrong way to go about it today. And like someone said above the highest performance canopys really aren't that elliptical. So to answer your question in a word its efficiency. The sabre 2 performs better than the orginal and it even flys faster than some canopys that have more taper and are considered higher performance. Many canopys perform different from one another. Try them all keep the one you like the best. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Squeak 17 #7 August 28, 2003 QuoteOK so if they have a flatter glide would they not give better straight in approach landing, given that they would come in on a shallower angle?? Define "better". Better as in shallower so that if a student jumper is coming in on a shallower angle the chances of a nail drive smack in (from a steep approach) are dramatically reduced. From what I've heard and read and seen it's easier to walk away from an approach that has planed out (or is shallow to start) than it is to walk away from a steep landing crash? Or is my thinking all arse about?You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
VectorBoy 0 #6 August 28, 2003 Most canopys are somewhat tapered to fairly eliptical. Sabre 1 s and tri s are pretty darn square or really rectangular. But all of the newer designs are at least a little tapered even canopys for jumpers off of student status. The reason is aerodynamic efficiency. Most aircraft wings are tapered quite a bit, very few are an absolute rectangle. Paragliders have an almost perfect elliptical planform even the student models. The "radicalness" ( for lack of a better word ) of any given high perfarmance canopy or single purpose higher performance crossbraced canopy comes not just from its elliptical shape but from all of its other designs specs. Things like how its center of ballance is located via line lengths or its trim in neutral flight. Inlet shape etc, play an equally important role in how it will open, fly, turn, dive and flare. And the VERY important heavy wing loading that they typically fly at. Load an original sabre that high and you will see some performance, although thats the wrong way to go about it today. And like someone said above the highest performance canopys really aren't that elliptical. So to answer your question in a word its efficiency. The sabre 2 performs better than the orginal and it even flys faster than some canopys that have more taper and are considered higher performance. Many canopys perform different from one another. Try them all keep the one you like the best. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #7 August 28, 2003 QuoteOK so if they have a flatter glide would they not give better straight in approach landing, given that they would come in on a shallower angle?? Define "better". Better as in shallower so that if a student jumper is coming in on a shallower angle the chances of a nail drive smack in (from a steep approach) are dramatically reduced. From what I've heard and read and seen it's easier to walk away from an approach that has planed out (or is shallow to start) than it is to walk away from a steep landing crash? Or is my thinking all arse about?You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #8 August 28, 2003 >Better as in shallower so that if a student jumper is coming in on a > shallower angle the chances of a nail drive smack in (from a steep >approach) are dramatically reduced. If you don't flare, lower vertical speed is your friend, and that's primarily influenced by wing loading i.e. a larger canopy will injure you less. If you do flare, the canopy with the most powerful flare (or, more accurately, the one _you_ can flare better) will give you the safer landing. Flat glide angle is really only an issue in terms of making it back from bad spots in no wind (or light wind) conditions. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #9 August 28, 2003 Quote If you don't flare, lower vertical speed is your friend, and that's primarily influenced by wing loading i.e. a larger canopy will injure you less. would this not hold true fo a lightly loaded canopy with a shallow glide angle, would it not also come in slower? Quote If you do flare, the canopy with the most powerful flare (or, more accurately, the one _you_ can flare better) will give you the safer landing. Flat glide angle is really only an issue in terms of making it back from bad spots in no wind (or light wind) conditions. what dictates the "powerful flare" Forward speed isn't it?You are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kris 0 #10 August 28, 2003 Quotewhat dictates the "powerful flare" Forward speed isn't it? To steal a line from Quade, that's part of it, in the same way that peanut butter equals sandwich. Many things affect flare but most of it is in the design of the canopy itself.Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
alain 0 #11 August 28, 2003 QuoteBetter as in shallower so that if a student jumper is coming in on a shallower angle the chances of a nail drive smack in (from a steep approach) are dramatically reduced. From what I've heard and read and seen it's easier to walk away from an approach that has planed out (or is shallow to start) than it is to walk away from a steep landing crash? what you describe here (quick planout) refers to the canopy's recovery arc, not to it's glide angle. At equivalent WL some HP canopy (compared to a conservative canopy) have the same glide but a larger recovery arc allowing them to dive longer and to keep the dive speed arround the corner and during the surf. croosfire comes to mind... (others too, that's just an example) Recovery arc varies with the canopy ability to gain some extra speed during diving manoeuvres: shape (aspect ratio, trim, nose shape, drag, ...) but also with wing-loading come into consideration: a conservative canopy with a short recovery arc at 1,1:1 gives a way larger recovery arc at 1,5:1. Tapered shapes were introduced when canopy designers started to increase aspect/ratio because a high aspect/ratio canopy tends to give end cell closures during radical turns (end cell presure issue, I guess) Eliptical is a slightly different thing: the canopy is not only tapered on the end cells but all cells are concerned which appears to give a cleaner shape. (Have a look at Icarus web site: they explain this better than I can do...) One can design a canopy more or less eliptical: the more you give, the higher aspect ratio you can apply => the canopy will become more efficient and radical because of less drag. alain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonto 1 #12 August 28, 2003 QuoteOther than swoop landings and carves, what else are high performance canopies used for. Keeping your cutaway drills current. I beleive upwards of 90% of jumpers belong on "squares" or light elipticals. It's all marketing. The real swoopers can swoop any rag. tIt's the year of the Pig. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkymonkeyONE 4 #13 August 28, 2003 Agreed. Seeing the mass, "no landing skill having" majority of participants at the WFFC will even further strengthen that belief. The incredibly vast majority of skydivers out there absolutely do not need a canopy more agressive than a Sabre2. Most people flying canopies more agressive that that have no concept of what their canopy is capable of, yet vanity urges them into "sexier" mains. Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
trigger 0 #14 August 28, 2003 I'm sure it's already been said,but a typical questions posed by "Randoms" is ,What canopy/size do you jump as if it matters. Problem is alot of skydivers seem to think is does and would rather answer "that" question with "pocket rocket rather than sky barge,but i will always maintain that you'll look a lot "cooler"under a canopy that you can fly and fly well than one that you can't. That said,it has to be asked what type of canopy flight do you enjoy. Point being that not every HP canopy pilot swoops or even intends to "swoop" but they simply enjoy the type of flight that their HP canopy delivers.i.e.response to toggle input for example..CHOP WOOD COLLECT WATER. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #15 August 28, 2003 QuoteAgreed. Seeing the mass, "no landing skill having" majority of participants at the WFFC will even further strengthen that belief. The incredibly vast majority of skydivers out there absolutely do not need a canopy more agressive than a Sabre2. Most people flying canopies more agressive that that have no concept of what their canopy is capable of, yet vanity urges them into "sexier" mains. Chuck Yep, and I wish people would get over it already.... A small main does not make you a better, cooler skydiver. (Or it might, and I'm just bad, and uncool?) Ron"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #16 August 28, 2003 >would this not hold true fo a lightly loaded canopy with a shallow >glide angle, would it not also come in slower? A bit, but going from a Sabre2 135 to a Sabre2 150 has a much greater effect on vertical speed than going from a Sabre2 135 to a Triathalon 135 (which does not have as good a glide angle.) You're better off under the larger canopy if you don't flare. >what dictates the "powerful flare" Forward speed isn't it? Forward speed. Loading. Planform. Brake trim. Wing rigidity. Brake geometry. Trim angle. And most importantly pilot skill. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Squeak 17 #17 August 29, 2003 Lucky I'm not actually looking at getting an eliptical for a while yet Iwas just curious as to why most ppl go eliptical and smaller generally at the same time. I would seem (to me at least) more prudent to learn how to fly what you have and then go eliptical at the same wingloading, rather than downsize AND go eliptical. That mentality seems pretty strong here in OzYou are not now, nor will you ever be, good enough to not die in this sport (Sparky) My Life ROCKS! How's yours doing? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #18 August 29, 2003 The answer is simple...people want to be cool. Elliptical and now Xbraced is seen as cool. I wanna be cool I have to have to cool toys. Then the manufactorers say things like "It flies bigger" "You need to really load it to really fly it." All BS."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
