PD Sabre 2 135 for me?

[tobiasz 0]

I've got 20 jumps. My exit is 160 pounds. I decide to by Sabre 2 135, but first im going to jump 30-40 times on 190, 170, 150 main (all) an jump on my conopy.
It's good idea???

[3fLiEr 0]

if your happy landing off in a tight area with obstacles possible doing a downwinder.............. then go for it........... my thoughts - 20 jumps and a semi-elliptical............. your gonna femur it in.................
just my 2 low pulls worth
"Hook Low Flare Late"
bsbd
"In a world where we are slaves to gravity I am pleased to be a freedom fighter"

[mwthomsen 0]

No.

[rapper4mpi 0]

I'd say you should have a minimum of 100 jumps on that 170 before going to the 150, then after you are completely ringing out every bit of performance out of that 150, then the 135 can be a consideration. With only 20 jumps, why get a new canopy now? My views may be conservative, but I watch what the pros do, and they have been quite conservative as well. Good luck.
-Rap

[RozeAY 0]

My exit weight is 125. I put about 20 jumps on a safire 149, and about 80 so far on a sabre 135 which I load at .9:1. I have a safire 119 waiting for me, but I'm not jumping it until I am completely satisfied with my landings on the 135. And that is my advice - keep the bigger canopy until you are insanely bored with it.

[rhino 0]

You need to start at 1.0 to 1.2 on a Triathlon. A sabre 2 is going to be WAAAAYYYY too fast for you.. You need to learn to flat turn a Triathlon class canopy and sink it in and hold in brakes.. You have MUCH to learn before going to that wing loading.. NOT A GOOD IDEA..A Triathlon160 would be a good 1st canopy for you. Put 150 jumps on that first. Then move to a 150 or a 135.
Rhino
Blue Skies and Smooth Rides!!
http://www.aahit.com

[PhreeZone 20]

Actually a larger Sabre2 would probally be perfect after another 15-20 jumps. A 150 would be the smallest I'd recommend till you get at least 100 more jumps. Also look at a used Safire 169 (They are about 5% smaller then advertised compaired to PD) or even an orgional Sabre 150. A Spectre or Tri are good ones to look at too.
Cause I don't wanna come back down from this cloud... ~ Bush

[Engovatov 0]

Do not use net forum for such decisions - they do not know you, and prefer to err on the safe side, and that is wise. Ask people you jump with.
My guess you will be fine. But you can die. Under any canopy. As if you did not know that.

[PhillyKev 0]

Agree with the above post. Personally I just got a Saber2 190 with an exit weight of 225. That puts me at about the same loading you're talking about. I've got 70 jumps. But I downsized to get there. About 20 jumps on student gear, 20 on a 230, 20 on a 210 and 10 on a 190 before purchasing a 190. I had instructors and people at the gear shop watch my landings and concentrated on improving my canopy skills on every jump. I consider myself to be conservative and safety conscious and feel safe on that size and confident I can land it safely in just about any conditions. In fact I did land the 190 off in a graveyard in 20mph winds between the headstones (looked like a big empty field until I got to close to find a new place to land).
If you and your instructors feel it is a safe size for you it will be a size you'll be able to stick with for awhile. And the Saber2 is a great canopy.
cielos azules y cerveza fría
-Kevin

[skybytch 273]

Quote

You need to start at 1.0 to 1.2 on a Triathlon

So... according to you every novice jumper should buy a Tri and load it at 1.0-1.2. How about the ones who can't stand up a .9 wingloading? What about the ones who jump at 5000' msl? Or perhaps the ones who prefer the flight and landing charecteristics of a nine cell?
The Triathlon is a great first canopy but it is NOT the right first canopy for every jumper. 1.0 is a good wingloading for a novice but it is NOT right for every novice. 1.2 is a bit too high for the MAJORITY of novice jumpers. Just because it worked well for you does NOT make it the right choice for everyone else.
pull and flare,
lisa
--
I'll be in the bar... you'll find me...

[billvon 2,989]

>I've got 20 jumps. My exit is 160 pounds. I decide to by Sabre 2 135, but first im going to jump 30-40 times on
>190, 170, 150 main (all) an jump on my conopy.
It's good idea???
I'd say "almost" but it's impossible to say for sure without seeing you fly. I will say this, though. If you put, say, 20 jumps on each of those canopies, and you get good instruction, and at the end of the 20 jumps you can:
-Body steer the canopy through opening
-Turn during opening with risers
-Flat turn and flare turn
-Front riser turn
-Do a bit of a high performance landing (i.e. 20 degree front riser turn to land)
-Flare with rear risers
-Fly relative to someone else under canopy (not CRW - just stay 5 feet away)
you _might_ be ready for the 135. Knowing nothing else, I'd recommend you stop at the 150 level for more than 20 jumps, but that decision will depend on your skills, landing elevation, landing area size, typical winds etc.
-bill von

[rhino 0]

I will put my son on a Triathlon for his first canopy loaded between 1.0 and 1.2.. With that said come to whatever conclusion you want. I will assume he is at or near sea level. If he was at 5000 feet msl he should or would have said so. The ones who can't stand up a .9 wing loading need to pick up another sport some time in the near future.
A Triathlon "square" not elliptical canopy at 1.0 should be o.k. for JUST ABOUT anyones first canopy. If they graduate AFF they should be able to land a canopy at .9 . The Triathlon has a broad enough of a flight envelope "especially on the slower end" that is would be my first choice for any beginner learning how to fly a canopy. It is better in wind and turbulence than any other canopy at it's loading. In my opinion. Sabre's are fast and not reliable in chop. I have seen a sabre drop a jumper 20 feet out of the air in medium rotors. I have been scared shitless under one a few times myself feeling that distinctive accordian feeling over my head. I know nothing about the sabre2 so I cannot comment but I would not jump a sabre as a main.
They may prefer the flight and landing characteristics of a nine cell but is that going to be the safest move at a lower wing loading. NOTHING at 1.0 is as safe as a Triathlon. It is impossible to convince me otherwise. I have flown through the same air as a sabre at 1.2 watching him bounce all over the sky and my Triathlon went right through without so much as a bump.
Saying I would put my son on one should say alot. I have 150 jumps on a Triathlon at 1.25. It was very stable, the flight range was great and the only reason I would have EVER gotten hurt on that thing is if I asked for it.
Rhino
Blue Skies and Smooth Rides!!
http://www.aahit.com

[TEB6363 0]

Go get em Lisa!!
The short story. Do yourself a favor and start slow. Spend at least 50 jumps with each canopy before you reduce size. Plan on being able to land in the worst area and conditions. Come out to Madera, We'll draw a 25-foot square on the ground and you can jump the canopy on a 115 degree zero wind day. If you are happy with your landing, it may be time to go smaller.
:::OK, Canopy is Open, No Traffic Around, .. Why are these "Extra" Lines Draping Down??, Damn!

[skycat 0]

Quote

If they graduate AFF they should be able to land a canopy at .9 .

Oh really, well I graduated AFF with out jumping a wingloading higher than .5 and I only had one stand up landing, (of course I usually had a pilot chute over the nose or was going backwards) I didn't jump a .9 wingloading until 100 jumps later and didn't get to over 1:1 until 200 jumps.
btw....tri's are just as supceptible to turbulence. I saw a guy at CouchFreaks last year hammer right in front of me in turbulence when his tri collapsed. I don't know his exact wingloading but it was definately over 1:1. My crossfire was breathing but she didn't collaps and set me down very nicely even though I could tell I had almost no flair due to the turbulance. My wingloading 1.1:1. So just because you had no issues with your tri doesn't mean that strait across the board they are perfect, if you ask me they land you harder and have very poor flair compared to 9 cells.
It's all personal preference.

[skybytch 273]

Quote

I will assume he is at or near sea level. If he was at 5000 feet msl he should or would have said so.

Don't assume. Many novices have no idea that the ground altitude they jump at affects the way a canopy flies; if they don't know that then how do they know it's an important bit of information to provide when asking for advice?

Quote

The ones who can't stand up a .9 wing loading need to pick up another sport some time in the near future.

Really? Well I'm glad I didn't listen to you when I had 100 jumps and couldn't stand up the .73 wingloading I was flying. I suppose the fact that I just upsized to a 1.0 wingloading means that I should give up the sport soon too. I know quite a few jumpers who will never fly a loading over 1.0 - glad they didn't listen to you because that would mean they wouldn't be jumping either and I'd have missed out on some really cool skydives - cuz many of them are better skydivers than you or I will ever be.

Quote

They may prefer the flight and landing characteristics of a nine cell but is that going to be the safest move at a lower wing loading.

Quite possibly it will be - and why shouldn't they be allowed to make their own mind up if they want a seven or nine cell? Seven cells are not inherently safer than nine cells, they are just different. Personally I prefer the way a seven cell flies and lands, but that does not mean that I think a seven cell is the right canopy for everyone.

Quote

Saying I would put my son on one should say alot.

That says that you like that canopy and would tell your son what to fly/buy. My son will be allowed to fly a number of different canopies at or below 1.0 and make his own mind up what he wants to spend his money on.
pull and flare,
lisa
--
I'll be in the bar... you'll find me...

[skymedic 0]

Bytch, No reason to argue with the guy.....he still thinks Racers are "Failproof".....
marc
BSBD

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

I know nothing about the sabre2 so I cannot comment

Sabre and Sabre2 are completely different canopies.

Quote

NOTHING at 1.0 is as safe as a Triathlon.

Sitting on your ass looking up at the sky is probably a bit safer. There's a tradeoff between acceptable performance and acceptable risk that every jumper must decide on.
Back to the poster's original question as it relates to the above, why have you decided on what to buy with 20 jumps under you? Have you flown 7 cells and 9 cells? ZP and F111. Before you plunk down the cash for a new canopy, try out a bunch first. Vast differences between them. And I'm even talking about the few that I've tried in my limited experience.
Slow turns, fast turns, sink it in, 2 stage flare, good glide ratio, ground hungry. Have to decide which of these characteristics you like. Then take a look at what size is safe for you in your preferred flavor. Then jump it before making your decision. And don't jump one size, like it and then buy the next size down of the same model without jumping it first. There will be vast differences in the way it flies and you may not like it.
cielos azules y cerveza fría
-Kevin

[rhino 0]

I know they aren't perfect. There is one thing I didn't like about the Triathlon on occasion. It is the same problem the Diablo has.. Sometimes the flare isnt' very responsive on a straight in. Needs a little extra juice to want to act properly. Sometimes.
Blue Skies and Smooth Rides!!
http://www.aahit.com

[rhino 0]

If I am buying it my son will be flying a Triathlon "Or something similar". I don't give a damn what he WANTS to fly. Just because he likes the flight characteristics of a VX doesn't mean that's the decision to make. It's my dollar and I know more about canopies than he does so it's my decision. Sometimes our experience can prove to be a benefit to others.
As far as landings are concerned it worries me when skydivers "especially new ones" put so much of their energy into freefall and not enough into learning how to get to the ground safely under canopy. Personally I am glad that you and Kelly hung in there and are still jumping. This sport needs the personality and God knows the sexy women running around. But on the other hand it worries me when a simple concept known as the flair is botched up time and time again by even experienced jumpers. Sure we all have bad landings that we can't really do anything about "sometimes". People don't pay enough attention to the most important thing in the sport.. Flying and landing the canopy safely.
As far as how safe a seven cell vs a nine cell is like a Triathlon and a Crossfire? I don't know the crossfire well enough but I know the Triathlon. I am not a Triathlon spokes person, I don't pump Triathlons but there are ignorant people out there that can't grasp the fact that a Triathlon at 1.0 is safer to fly in turbulence than a sabre at 1.0 they chose to say 9 cells is better than 7 cells. If you disagree that's o.k. We are allowed to. I feel when you are at or below 1.1 a Triathlon or lets even say a Spectre or Triathlon type canopy provides extra safety where windy days and chop are concerned. 7 cell canopies at lower wing loadings SAVE LIVES. It is my humble but ACCURATE opinion.
To have a Triathlon fold like that there must have been some really bad chop.. I hope the guy is o.k. and I hope everyone that landed in that condition learned something from it.
And it's failsafe....lol
Rhino
Blue Skies and Smooth Rides!!
http://www.aahit.com

[PhreeZone 20]

Grrr... hit a pet peave of mine and I think Alan's and a few other peoples. A 7 cell is no more inheridently stable in turbulence then a 9 cell. What keeps a canopy inflated? Air flowing over the wing and into the wing right? 7 cells go slower then 9 cells do generally do to their lower glide rate. In order to maintain proper presuration in a canopy it has to have a ideal airspeed. In most instances a 9 cell will be travleing faster to start with so it maintains its pressure better then a 7 cell.
Here is a post Alan made on 7vs 9 cells last year. In fact here is an entire thread about this same topic... that you started and were shown how the higher airspeed causes more inflation in normal flight and less turbulence on a 9 cell then on a 7 cell.
Cause I don't wanna come back down from this cloud... ~ Bush

[rhino 0]

lol
Blue Skies and Smooth Rides!!
http://www.aahit.com

[Albatross 0]

Oh Shit I am going to comit the big sin. I am agreeing with Clay. Bottom line is that a small highly loaded canopy is like to behave better in turblance than a slow flying canopy. The presurisation of the canopyis going to keep the wing in form and the flight characteristics constant. As for the preformance of the canopy in a 7 vs. a 9 cell, it is a simplistic view to say that one out preforms another. The "conventional" square is going to fly in a more "stable" manner because of the design of the wing not the # of cells. However, due to the aspect ratio of the wing most 9cells are faster flying more responsive at the same wing loads. Conversely the 7 cell bacuse of its design is likely to have a better lift and flare at slower speeds.
All of this means that each conopy fly better for a different type of pilot and at different wing loadings. If you ry to land a Saber 2 like a Triathalon it is not getting the best match for the flight style and canopy. In MY opinion most if not all newly licenced jumpers should jump a canopy between .7 and 1.1:1 and it should be of the conventional Square design. This provides a big increase in the lift and flight characteristics of these canopies and should help most of them land. HOWEVER, if the pilot does not feel like they can fly and land the canopy at that "high" a wingload then they should jump a lighter loaded canopy that will not "fly" as well but will land them with a slower vertical speed and not hurt them. In th e end it is all about making the next load.
God bless us and God Bless America
Albatross

[Watcher 0]

And this is even though we know she could fly the 119 perfectly fine. 1.1:1 for the frst 100 jumps then if you are current (ie 30-40 jumps a month) and you a more of a natural flyer and interested in getting into the more high performance then push it up to 1.6:1 Ellipticals. They fly very nice, and the nitron has amazing ass saving bottom end Flare.
Jonathan
D-24876

[AndyMan 7]

rhino, the Icarus Omega, Icarus Student ZP, and PD Navigator, PD Spectre are all just as safe as the Triathlon by any arguemnt.
Many, myself included will argue the Sabre2 and Icarus Safire are also perfectly safe at an appropriate wingloading.
Quit talking out of your ass.
_Am
ICQ: 5578907
MSN Messenger: andrewdmetcalfe at hotmail dot com
Yahoo IM: ametcalf_1999

[rhino 0]

I won't argue that.. Are they all seven cell canopies?
Of the bunch which aren't at all elliptical?
Blue Skies and Smooth Rides!!
http://www.aahit.com