Canopy size

[edd 0]

What size canopys do peaple buy when they finish there AFF.

[Ruffles 0]

My instructors told me not to get anything that was loaded over a 1:1 ratio. I ended up with a Silhouette 210 that is like 1 to 1.1, and that I guess is no big deal. Recommendations:
1) Get a relatively square canopy (I say relatively because there are some that are tapered on the ends, which is not really elliptical)
2) Try to load it at a 1:1 ratio or less
3) Buy PD chutes. Everybody told they're the best.
4) Talk to your AFFIs and see what they say

[AggieDave 6]

Step #1: Talk to your instructors about what you should buy.
Step #2: See step #1.

I was trying to be a little humorous (probably wasn't, though), but seriously, talk to the people who trained you and see how you fly your canopy, since they'll be the ones that would tell you what would be right for you.

With that said, keep in mind what was mentioned in the post above mine, keep it at/around 1:1 (divide your exit weight by the canopy size to get the ratio). You'll have plenty of time later to downsize and "try to look cool" with a small canopy. Do it too soon and you'll "look cool with your femurs sticking out of your legs" if you're lucky.

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

[skybytch 273]

It really depends on the person - their body weight, their ability, the amount of risk they are willing to take with their body, how aggressive they are, their previous injuries, their job, how current they will be able to stay, how old they are, what kind of physical condition they are in...

It's common today for jumpers just off student status to purchase canopies that they will load between 1.0 and 1.2 pounds suspended weight per sq.ft. of canopy. The size that would be right for you may or may not be right for someone else - even someone who weighs the same as you and has the same number of jumps.

Like Dave said, talk to your instructors about what size main and reserve canopies you should be considering. If they are recommending something that you think may be a bit much for you, then thank them for their advice and confidence in you - and buy something a bit bigger.

Some will tell you that you will get "bored" under a main you load at 1.0 after 100 jumps or so.... I say if you do, then it's time to start learning how to make that canopy fly faster - it's not time to downsize. If you truly master flying a 1.0 loaded main before going smaller you just may avoid joining those who added titanium to their legs (or worse) before they got to 500 jumps....

Get canopy control coaching! If your dz doesn't offer it, ask them to. If they won't/can't, travel to a dz that does. There's an awful lot about flying a canopy that you don't learn in AFF. The ability to fly and land your canopy in any conditions is a survival skill; make a point of learning all you possibly can about it.

[Scoby 0]

Y'know, whenever you tell people how to buy something safe, it gives me the warm fuzzies.
I've noticed that at different DZs, people are unsafe in different ways. One place, it is too small too fast. At another place, it's ellipticals and cross braces way too early.

I don't have the experience to make judgements about other peoples' canopy choices. I just know that I've seen a bunch of scary landings and that I don't have the stomach to see people get hurt.

Be safe out there, people!

[rgoper 0]

i'm by no means an expert, but i would go with a Triathlon with a 1:1:0 wing load. it's a forgiving canopy and easy to land.

on another level, i know of a couple of dz's that are starting their students out on semi-elipiticals. their theory being train them on what their going to wind up with anyway. i don't know how much i buy into this train of thought since it can only lead up to us going one step further and training students on fully elipiticals, maybe even x-braced? but it's being done. what are your thoughts on the matter?

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[AndyMan 7]

Quote

1) Get a relatively square canopy (I say relatively because there are some that are tapered on the ends, which is not really elliptical)
2) Try to load it at a 1:1 ratio or less
3) Buy PD chutes. Everybody told they're the best.
4) Talk to your AFFIs and see what they say

Good advice, accept for (3). You'll notice that as you move around the country to different DZ's, that there really are only two different kinds of dropzones. Those that are PD snobs, and those that are not. Dropzones being PD snobs is usually associated with being sponsored by PD.

PD makes some very fine canopies, I jump one myself - but to assume they're the best just because your particular DZ is a PD snob-joint, is naieve.

I would replace (3) with "Make sure you demo the canopy before you buy it, jump it in low or no winds, and only buy it if you feel comfortable."

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[Scoby 0]

Not everyone will end up flying elliptical canopies, but nobody will end up flying a Manta. Maybe it does make sense if students learn on canopies that are similar to their first canopies. Perhaps this, combined with proper canopy instruction, would lead to fewer injuries coming under fully functioning parachutes? I can't say either way, but it certainly seems like something needs to change.

[rgoper 0]

Quote

Not everyone will end up flying elliptical canopies, but nobody will end up flying a Manta

your probably right on with this statement. i think it's actually a "double edged sword" myself. imo i think canopy control training should be required before a newbie starts flying a "dishrag" for a canopy. i believe as well, some of the newer instructors are flying high performance canopies themselves and are trying to bring a new philosophy to the sport with them. only time will tell if it "pans out" my hope is that the "learning curve" doesn't get too many people hurt, or worse yet kill someone, or get killed themselves. maybe i'm too "conservative?" in the end, people are gonna' do, what they're gonna do.

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[Scoby 0]

Quote

maybe i'm too "conservative?" in the end, people are gonna' do, what they're gonna do.

I defintely think that being conservative is the way to go. I'm just not sure if training people on huge canopies and then sending them out into the world is really the conservative approach. I took my motorcycle training on a Honda 125. I then went out and got a 600cc sportbike and had some really interesting experiences. I survived it, but looking back at things, it probably would have been safer for me to learn on a 600.

I think this may be true of canopies as well. Perhaps the right thing to do is to train people on relatively docile canopies, but ones that relate more to what they'll be using later on?

I'm not sure if my opinion is valid, since I'm relatively inexperienced. However, something seems wrong to me. Way too many people are getting hurt. There needs to be a different approach.

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

I defintely think that being conservative is the way to go. I'm just not sure if training people on huge canopies and then sending them out into the world is really the conservative approach. I took my motorcycle training on a Honda 125. I then went out and got a 600cc sportbike and had some really interesting experiences. I survived it, but looking back at things, it probably would have been safer for me to learn on a 600.

Do you not see the flaw in your thinking here? I think that realistically, it might have been safer for you to transition from the 125, to a 250, to a 450, to a 600. Make sense? That's the conservative approach. It's not conservative at all putting someone who's never ridden before on a CBR600, that's just dangerous to the student and those who he will share the road with.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[rgoper 0]

Quote

I think this may be true of canopies as well

at the inception of sky diving, sky divers were getting injured because of equipment failure, now many years later, with gear at the height of engineering design with safety at the forefront we have sky divers being seriously injured and killed under fully inflated mains and perfectly good equipment. some of the sky divers that have been at this for over 20+ years will tell you to "fly big" "live long" "land safe" but maybe that's why they've been sky diving as long as they have? i have seen too many people hurt and killed since i started sky diving a short 3 years ago. i'm glad i started at age 41, because if i had started when i was 18, i can tell you i wouldn't be here right now because even as old as i am, i'm still an adrenaline junkie.

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[PhreeZone 20]

>Way too many people are getting hurt. There needs to be a different approach.

Its called learning canopy skills. The issue is most people think that just since they can stand up 10 landings in a row they have learned a lot about their canopy. I've heard it time after time at the DZ. The real test is seeing how you handle those times where everything has gone wrong. The times you see your in the corner on a HP landing, the times where you are realizing you are downwind at 100 feet, the times where some one cuts you off at 50 feet. Canopy skills are not the easiest to learn and it takes a good teacher to really make you learn the skills. There just are'nt enought people willing to seek out the teachers. You can't force some one to learn if they don't want to....

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[Scoby 0]

It would make perfect sense, if I could actually go out and get a 400. But that's not the case, and it's unrealistic to think that way. They don't even sell streetbikes in any displacement smaller than a 600. The reality is that a CBR600 is an entry level bike. Realizing this and training coordingly is a whole lot safer than pretending that people will spend a lot of time on a 250. A 600 is the motorcycle equivalent of a semi-elliptical loaded at 1:1. It's docile enough to learn on, but more than enough to get someone killed. Training should be oriented to the real world and not some idealized world where people will spend 100 jumps under a PD260 loaded at .8 to 1.

Or that's my current thinking anyway. Convince me that I'm wrong and I'll change my opinion. I'm all ears.

[Scoby 0]

For what it's worth, I'm taking the Evolution canopy class at Perris the instant my main arrives. I'm not interested in being a statistic. I'm too much of a wuss to nurse broken bones and it would screw up my snowboarding season.

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

They don't even sell streetbikes in any displacement smaller than a 600. The reality is that a CBR600 is an entry level bike.

Uhm... I just checked Honda's webpage, it looks to me like they're still making the Rebel and the Nighthawk. Then, there's always the used market too. Those are all street bikes, what they aren't is crotch-rockets. Had you worked your way up through those bikes and then onto the CBR you might have had a less interesting, but maybe safer career on your bike. I'm only getting on you because you did with a bike what most people do under a canopy. They focus on the hot-shit ride that their friend has, but they ignore how they got there. There are lots of models in between, not as exciting, but probably necessary for a well rounded education.

Quote

Training should be oriented to the real world and not some idealized world where people will spend 100 jumps under a PD260 loaded at .8 to 1.

What's unreal about that? Nobody forced you to buy whatever you did when you graduated from student status.

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[PhreeZone 20]

They put on a great class from the sounds of it, but don't think just since you took the class you are safe. Its application of that knowledge on every jump is the only way to decrease the odds of becoming a statistic. And it might not be your error that causes you to go in... some one may hook into you at 300 feet, turbulence can nail a canopy at any altitude (including 14000 feet on a CRW jump as I found out), or there might just be an act of god that takes you out.

The issue is for all the jumpers that don't have someone at their DZ that can actually teach (doing and teaching are totally different), and finding good teachers is hard too. All they have to go on is the stuff they learned in student training. Pull right turns right, pull left goes left. They will equate that same thing to if they need to make a turn to avoid something at 40 feet.

Learning CRW and doing some hot rotations and formations teaches you a lot about canopy inputs and how to learn the potential of canopies. Doing up close flying is a good way to learn about canopies too. Videod landings will show you a lot, including if you are flaring a bit uneven, if you are not flaring early enough ot too late.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[skybytch 273]

Quote

Training should be oriented to the real world and not some idealized world where people will spend 100 jumps under a PD260 loaded at .8 to 1.

I'd much rather see students on zp mains that they load at about .8:1. imho that's a light enough wingloading that they can likely walk away from all but the worst mistakes, and they'll learn the "zp flare" (i.e. flying the canopy all the way through the landing) right from the start instead of having to "relearn" canopy control once they are off student status.

I don't agree with putting students on canopies that they load over 1.0 though, regardless of how "talented" the student may be. To me the logical progression would be something like a Triathlon or Navigator loaded at around .8 for AFF jumps, then transition down to something loaded about 1.0 - 1.1 (depending on the age and aggressiveness of the novice) for the next 100+ jumps minimum before downsizing any further - and that 100+ jumps should include some thorough post-AFF canopy control training.

I'm beginning to think that the canopy control training should be done as soon after the student finishes AFF as possible. Learning to really fly and safely land a canopy in any situation/conditions is far more important to a novice's chances of long term survival than RW or freefly coaching.

[rgoper 0]

i agree with your remarks. i think maybe even making "downsizing" a part of training somehow. maybe have them fly a 280+ transition (or equivalent of .08:1) them down to a 1:1 wing? let them experience the "feel" of downsizing, before they lose 89-90 sq feet of canopy when they buy they're own gear? there's gotta be a better way.

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"

[Scoby 0]

That sounds very sensible to me. Perhaps canopy training should be part of getting an A license. I don't understand why students get F111 mains at all (unless it's all because they're easier to pack).

[Scoby 0]

I know that skydiving is not safe. However, the risks can be managed. I understand that if everything goes wrong at once, I can get hurt or die even if I do everything right. But I'm a big wuss and I'll take every chance to tilt the odds in my favor.

I want to learn everything there is to know about flying a canopy safely. I will take my time, and be as safe as possible.

[billvon 2,991]

>but nobody will end up flying a Manta.

Gary Peek, regional director candidate, test jumper and chief organizer at the WFFC, jumps a Manta. I know several other jumpers who do.

[Scoby 0]

The point that I'm making (and I could certainly be wrong, so bear with me) is that 600s are the de facto entry level, and so having a training program geared around 250s is wrongheaded and potentially dangerous. Ideally, everyone would be safer if they slowly transitioned up in displacement. But in the real world, this isn't going to happen, so why have this fantasy that it will? Why not face reality and train people to use what they are going to use?

Has this metaphor been stretched to far? I'm sorry...

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

But in the real world, this isn't going to happen, so why have this fantasy that it will? Why not face reality and train people to use what they are going to use?

And the point I was making, was that this 'real world' you speak of is created by US. No one forced you to buy the 600, you knew that there were other, smaller, less performance models in between that 125 and the 600, yet you chose to go straight for the 600. It's the same thing with canopies (and that's the only reason I'm still on this subject.) I don't know of anyone who was forced to go from their student canopy at .8:1 directly to a Crossfire at 1.4. The 'real world' is what we make it, BillVon just listed an example of a skydiver with thousands of jumps who still jumps a Manta (the canopy you claimed nobody would jump after student status.)

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[rgoper 0]

Quote

Why not face reality and train people to use what they are going to use?

i'm afraid you might just be granted this wish. all i'll say is i'm glad i didn't do it that way. there is no way a student can land a canopy like this 100 times safely, it's mathamatically impossible. i've got almost 500 jumps, and last jump i made i busted my ass, it was the first time in a long time, but it happened. the only thing for certain in this sport is "you WILL land"

--Richard--
"We Will Not Be Shaken By Thugs, And Terroist"