NathanL100 0 #1 September 7, 2002 What is everyone's opinion on a wingloading on a reserve that's survivable to land unconscious in these two circumstances? Landing in the middle of a big field with nothing solid to fly into. Or Flying into the side of something solid like a house, tree, wall, hill, car/van, etc....... And lets say you're flying downwind too.Base # 942 The race is long and in the end, its only with yourself. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflir29 0 #2 September 7, 2002 The possiblities are endless so all you can do is give an opinion. Mine is...being that you should still have your breaks stowed if you are unconicous, I'll say anything above 1.4 or so is going to DRASTICALLY reduce your chances of surviving uninjured. If you are unconcious that will help you to NOT recieve further injury because you are limp and offer no resistance. I know a guy that burned in under 2 cells of his main, bounced about 8 Ft straight back up, and lived. The docs said had he been at all concious he would have died on impact. Of course....had he been concious he would have cut away and pulled his reserve. I don't think about being unconcious under my reserve much. I don't have a Cypres..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #3 September 7, 2002 Well, I was told by someone who's very famous in the sport to buy the biggest PD reserve they would make me, since I'm a very big boy (280ish out the door). Why? Only because I plan I buying a Cypres, on the phone he said, and I quote "anything smaller and you will die!" Told my rigger that, told my coaches that and talked to some of the other instructers I nkow that. What did they do? They laughed. Why? Its simply not practical, I would have to jump what would basically be a converted tandem container to fit that reserve. What did I do? I ordered a reserve that was similar to the canopy that I jump. If I come in under my reserve unconcious will I come out alive? More then likely, baring me landing in traffic on the highway or something like that. Will I be 100% ok with no injuries? No, I'll probably break a leg(s) and do some damage, but I'll be alive. And personally, that's something I'm willing to live with.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Macaulay 0 #4 September 7, 2002 Maybe they meant "...any less reserves than that...", cause, if you chop, and you have less than one reserve, you will die. Well... even then. - Mac Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skreamer 1 #5 September 7, 2002 QuoteAnd lets say you're flying downwind too. If you were unconscious under canopy wouldn't that be a given? Without any input from the pilot (harness, toggles or risers) wouldn't any canopy turn downwind and stay downwind? Will Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ernokaikkonen 0 #6 September 7, 2002 >Without any input from the pilot (harness, toggles or risers) wouldn't any >canopy turn downwind and stay downwind? This has been discussed here many times. The answer is "No". The canopy does not know which way the wind blows. The canopy flies relative to the airmass. If you remove all reference points(ie. the ground), there is no way of telling the wind direction under canopy. If this made no sense, it's because I'm suffering from a terribe hangover. Do a search, it's been explained in greater detail somewhere else on the forums... Erno Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kris 0 #7 September 7, 2002 QuoteIf you were unconscious under canopy wouldn't that be a given? Without any input from the pilot (harness, toggles or risers) wouldn't any canopy turn downwind and stay downwind? Aagh! Someone post a "move-along" sign before Quade & Bill Von get in here! Seriously, the canopy could care less which way the mass of air you are in is moving, just like Erno said. I wonder how many of those people who think that their canopie turn with the wind might have been leaning just a hair in their harness or were flying a canopy with just a bit of a built-in turn (due to construction or improper brake settings)... KrisSky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Viking 0 #8 September 7, 2002 Quote> If you remove all reference points(ie. the ground), there is no way of telling the wind direction under canopy. ever heard of Penitration Checks? You should be able to tell even with out the ground if you going faster or slower in one direction or the other.I swear you must have footprints on the back of your helmet - chicagoskydiver My God has a bigger dick than your god -George Carlin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ernokaikkonen 0 #9 September 7, 2002 The dead horse is sure getting a beating again... >ever heard of Penitration Checks? You should be able to tell even with out the >ground if you going faster or slower in one direction or the other. No. The only way of detecting how well your canopy is penetrating into the wind is by reference to the ground. The airspeed(the speed of your canopy relative to the airmass it is flying in) of your canopy remains constant regardless of whether you're going downwind or upwind. If you would close your eyes under canopy, upwind and downwind would feel exactly the same. Please remember not to try that in crowded airspace. Erno Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #10 September 7, 2002 Perfect example of this is a hot air balloon. You can be inside the basket with 50 mph winds all around you, but you will not FEEL any wind. You are moving inside an airmass thats moving. With out refrence points the opject you are in/under has no idea about winds, its just moving in what appears to be a stationary air mass.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,073 #11 September 7, 2002 >What is everyone's opinion on a wingloading on a reserve that's > survivable to land unconscious in these two circumstances? In both cases, an unmodified 28' or larger round reserve will land you more survivably than any other type of reserve canopy. Even a modified round is better than a square in most cases. If you got a cypres primarily 'in case you get knocked out' a round reserve makes a lot of sense from a survivability point of view. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,073 #12 September 7, 2002 >They laughed. Why? Its simply not practical . . .I would have to jump > what would basically be a converted tandem container to fit that > reserve. It is certainly practical; a Raven 4 (282 sq ft) and PD-281R will both fit in a Talon T8, and I have jumped such rigs (we have a Telesis with a Raven 4.) There may well be other reasons behind your decision to jump a smaller reserve, but impracticality is not really a reasonable one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,073 #13 September 7, 2002 >ever heard of Penitration Checks? You should be able to tell even > with out the ground if you going faster or slower in one direction or > the other. Nope. If you do this, you will discover the canopy's airspeed is the same in all directions. You need to see the ground to see which direction gives you a higher _groundspeed._ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jessica 0 #14 September 7, 2002 I've always been told an F-111 main canopy gets funky above a 1:1 or so loading. I jump a PD 170 at .9ish, and I was under the impression it wasn't a good idea to load it much higher than that. So then why is it OK (or common, anyway) to load reserves, which are almost exclusively constructed of F-111 fabric, at much higher loadings? Is it because they're essentially brand-new canopies with at most, a few jumps on them?Skydiving is for cool people only Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,073 #15 September 8, 2002 >I've always been told an F-111 main canopy gets funky above a 1:1 > or so loading. Partly; I had a PD170 for a little while, and you had to be careful on it i.e. not flare hard or suddenly. New, they're not too bad; when they get old they get nasty and unpredictable. >So then why is it OK (or common, anyway) to load reserves, which > are almost exclusively constructed of F-111 fabric, at much higher >loadings? Two reasons I know of. One, as you're said, newer F111 fabric is less porous, and thus is closer to ZP in how it lands. It still doesn't land the same as, say, a triathalon, but it's closer than a ragged out F111 canopy. Two, they don't know how an F111 canopy lands, so they get the same size reserve as their main assuming they will get the same sort of performance out of it. This, of course, is a very dangerous assumption, since even different reserves land differently. I try to get people who want, say, a PD113R to jump one before they buy it, but they usually don't. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Deuce 1 #16 September 8, 2002 I'm curious about this too. Is there a concensus of opinion on wingloading of reserves? Is it the same thinking as mains? The skills list you (Billvon) put out a while back was very informative regarding downsizing mains, would you apply the same skills list to landing a particualr sized reserve? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #17 September 9, 2002 Before you buy a reserve... demo one. PD and PA will both ship you a demo reserve hooked up to risers if you ask for one. Try to jump it on the hottest day you can find with no wind and pick a small target to try and land on/near (thats safe). That will give a good indication of if the canopy needs to be larger or not. I'm yet to hear anyone ever say... gee... I wish my reserve was 20 feet smaller for that off DZ landing...Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
