cloud9 0 #1 July 19, 2003 Hey guys I posted this in discussions and didn't get much reply especially from cross braced canopy flyers. Ok I don’t know if I’m misinformed or if many others are. But here’s the deal; I keep hearing folks talking about canopies like the Stiletto, Crossfire2, Nitron, Cobalt well you get the picture. Now where the confusion comes in is this. I hear it said all the time they are just under the Xbrace performace or a transition canopy to Xbrace. Or it’s ok to fly an elliptical canopy but you’re not ready for a Xbrace yet. At the same wing loading like say a 1.6 what would make the Xbrace canopy any higher performance then say a Crossfire2? The only reason I can see that a cross-braced canopy is a higher performance is because you can load it heavier. I don’t think an FX 119 at a 1.6 wing loading would turn any faster, dive any longer be any more dangerous or perform any better then a Crossfire2 119 with the same wing loading. In fact it may be more forgiving. But I don’t have any experience either, so if I’m wrong would someone please tell me how the cross bracing makes a canopy more high performance except that it can be loaded heavier. I’ve heard it said that until you load a cross brace canopy you wouldn’t see any improvement over a non-Xbraced. In fact it seems to me that many times at lower wing loadings a Xbraced canopy would be more docile then a non-xbraced elliptical. Any thoughts on this? Is my thinking flawed? I'm thinking that at a lower wing loading a cross braced canopy would be more rigid therefore you would be landing more sq ft then under a non-xbraced. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyhi 24 #2 July 19, 2003 QuoteI don’t think an FX 119 at a 1.6 wing loading would turn any faster, dive any longer I thought most cross-braces required positive input to plane out, but something like a Stiletto (never jumped a crossfire) would plane out on its own? I have saw two very experienced elliptical flyers land very hard becuase they didn't put that cortrol input in on time. Might be negative habit transfer on their part from so much elliptical flying. Quien sabe?Shit happens. And it usually happens because of physics. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkymonkeyONE 4 #3 July 19, 2003 Crossbraced canopies pack quite a bit bigger than same-sized, non-braced canopies. Most do dive longer as well. Crossbracing is designed to keep the wing more rigid, thus allowing a flatter, more aerodynamic airfoil and one which won't distort under heavier loads. You don't need to be buying a crossbraced canopy and try to "ease into it". You had better be wringing the piss out of whatever you are currently jumping prior to investing (they are VERY expensive comparitively) in a braced canopy. They should absolutely NOT be a vanity purchase. There are far better choices for skydivers who are not in that very-small niche who "just want to swoop." Chuck Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JessB 0 #4 July 19, 2003 I agree with skymonkey1. These are far too expensive a canopy to be developing skills with. If you fly a x-braced canopy at a light loading you will not be able to get near the performance that the canopy is designed for. You are far better to stick with an elliptical if you want to be at a more conservative loading level. If at a point you would want to get into a more aggressive loaded x-braced. Your pack volumes would be near the same. I went from an elliptical loaded at 2.0 to a x-brace loaded 2.6. The x-braced fit like "a bug in a rug". My .02 Stay with the elliptical to learn flying. I don't think anyone will dispute this opinion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #5 July 19, 2003 Here's my outlook... Buying a X-braced canopy to learn swooping is like buying a McLaren F1 at 16 to learn how to drive. You'll crash it and die (or get hurt), or hopefully it'll give a hard wakeup call and it'll be shelved (even when trying to "drive" it slow). But then again, that's just my outlook/opinion and I'm not an expert like Skymonkey (since I only have about 600 jumps and am not jumping a x-braced).--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sneaky 0 #6 July 19, 2003 Hi Bud I have been jumping an FX for the last 2000 skydives.Its a great canopy and the adventages weigh up the Drawbacks evenly....but only in the right hands.I get asked alot of questions from people wanting to graduate onto a xbrace or want too know more about the canopy.I always try and persuade them not too until you are maxing out your Eliptical and want the next step. I think that until you are ready there is no reason too jump a highly loaded Xbrace when there are so many great canopys on the market that out weigh the FX in terms of reliabilty and have great performace.I have a friend who is on par in swoop ability and can carve his Spectre 120 like nobody.I cannot do this on my FX ( Yet !).....So this is a great example that it is the pilot..and not the canopy that is the underlining factor in the art of the swoop. Some perfect comments from the experts here on this thread...I agree that this canopy is only for the very select few and expert skydivers who love the swoop ( But still as dangerous in the wrong hands) .You have to load at the optimal ratio for best performance.Otherwise you are wasting your money,and time. When you are ready Talk to the Pros ( like pd swooping team.. Bobo ) or the manufacture's and they'll advice..what will work for you.( When its time too move on obviously ... please dont get one yet...) When I got mine back in 1997 I foned Jyro ( The designer ) and just said I wanted an FX,and send me what you think will work for me.2 weeks later I got my White with Blue FX99.Awesome.... Xbraces are fantastic stuff..But its wild animal.Treat it badly and it will turn and bite you very hard.Keep her on the leash and under full control. But thats the same with any canopy...... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sneaky 0 #7 July 19, 2003 AggieDave.... You have hit the nail on the head here well done!! Listen to this Guy...he knows what hes talking about! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #8 July 19, 2003 I myself went to a crossbraced canopy. I bought a brand new Xaos21 98sqft at 1.85. Canopy I jumped before that was a Diablo110. So I was use to INSTANT reaction from the canopy when I touched a toggle. The Diablo was insanely fast turning and diving. Jumped on the Xaos and it felt like a boat. Turned slow, front riser pressure was heavy, and it took alot of toggle pressure to maneuver the canopy the way I was use to. Now.. There was nothing wrong with the Xaos. The flight characteristics at that wing loading simply weren't what I was looking for. Got a new Crossfire2, 97sqft. The crossfire2 at the same loading outperforms the Xaos in EVERY aspect of flight BUT bottom end. At that wing loading. Unless I "Someday WAAAY in the future" can find a crossbraced canopy that can turn as fast, dive as hard as the crossfire2 or Diablo I might never go back to crossbraced. I likely wasn't loading the Xaos enough. I am simply not willing to go to 2.2+ at the moment.. Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sneaky 0 #9 July 19, 2003 really...I thought the xaos was something special.? I have ordered a new CF2 109 and a Spectre 120... so I get a balance....The FX will be hanging up for a while....until my neck gets better Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hookitt 1 #10 July 19, 2003 The Xaos Rocks! Especially the 27 cell. Rhino indicated that at the wingloading he was flying, it didn't perform as desired. I have to agree since I've flown most kinds of canopies and also have several thousand jumps at 1.7 on up on a stiletto. At that wingloading, the Xaos just didn't do what i'd want it to. At 2.2 to 2.3... It's amazing. At that wingload on a Xaos, Rhino would be asking to die at his current experience level which was also duly noted. Any way...it is something special. Properly loaded X-brace canopies in the right hands is pretty Badass.My grammar sometimes resembles that of magnetic refrigerator poetry... Ghetto Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkymonkeyONE 4 #11 July 19, 2003 Well, it's all apples and oranges when it comes to comparison. Some people want twitchy, fast turning canopies and some want smooth, hard diving, swooping machines. In the end it comes down to personal preference. I can't say that I have ever jumped a crossbraced canopy that turned as quickly as my old Stilletto, but then again that's not what I am after nowadays. I want to open, make it back to the DZ after being next to last out on an AFF jump, then swoop the living dog shiti out of the course. My Velocity does that very, very well. In a wingsuit jump, I have no problem, ever, making it back to the DZ, so my Sabre2 does fine. It's just an added bonus that I can swoop the dog shit out of it due to it's small size and incredible range. Once again: the right tool for the job. See you all in Rantoul, Chuckie Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhino 0 #12 July 20, 2003 QuoteAt that wingload on a Xaos, Rhino would be asking to die No I wouldn't.. lol I've jumped my xf2 at that loading.. I simply don't want to.. I like the combination of air time/performance/dive/everything at the wing loading I am at on the canopy I am flying.. I've got an infinite amount to learn on my xf2 for now.. lol Rhino Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMFin 0 #13 July 20, 2003 As a novice, I dont have anything else to say than this is a VERY good question in my opinion. Even so good, not no one has been able to REALLY answer this question yet IMO. Only arguments against so far are : -Larger packing volume of cross braced´s -Expensiveness Comments like "you dont need to do it yet" are not good enough IMO. You dont need to buy 300 $ running shoes just for your sunday exercise either, but they sure as hell are not going to water down the exercise either. Only good argument was that the recovery arc of cross braced´s is longer. Can anyone add more to it ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
andy2 0 #14 July 20, 2003 I'm pretty sure thats enough for me as an inexperienced canopy pilot to steer clear of Xbraced for the next 1k jumps or so. The (relative) short recovery arc that 9 cells gives you a safer swooping canopy to learn on. Correct? True, they don't swoop as long, but you're learning. IMO, you dont need a better reason than its easier to kill yourself on a Xbraced canopy bc of the long recovery arc (meaning it wants to stay in that front riser dive). Death is a pretty major negative, it should play some part in your deciding what canopy you want. Shouldnt it? Am I correct on my reasoning? --------------------------------------------- let my inspiration flow, in token rhyme suggesting rhythm... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #15 July 20, 2003 QuoteYou dont need to buy 300 $ running shoes just for your sunday exercise either, but they sure as hell are not going to water down the exercise either. Sure, but those $300 running shoes won't toss your butt into the ground seriously breaking yourself up or killing you! I'm sorry, but your analogy really doesn't work in this context.--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMFin 0 #16 July 21, 2003 QuoteQuoteYou dont need to buy 300 $ running shoes just for your sunday exercise either, but they sure as hell are not going to water down the exercise either. Sure, but those $300 running shoes won't toss your butt into the ground seriously breaking yourself up or killing you! I'm sorry, but your analogy really doesn't work in this context. This is true. The shoes will not toss your ass in to the ground, but the question is why would the crossbraced canopy toss you in your ass any more than an elliptical loaded the same ? So as long as you cant explain me why this is I would consider my analogy pretty correct. one good argument so far : -Recovery arc Any others ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
AggieDave 6 #17 July 21, 2003 After I wrote the post below, I reread your post, and you already stated recovery arc. Even though you stated it, I consider it to be a very valid point, so I'm going to go ahead and post it. Sure. Here's the difference, as I understand it (which could very well be wrong, SkymonkeyOne/Hooknswoop/etc please feel free to set me straight). Negative recovery arc vs. positive recovery arc. A lot of the popular 9cell ellipicals have a positive recovery arc (some of them are quite short, i.e. Stiletto), most of the x-braces out there don't have a full positive recovery arc. They dive harder, faster, longer. Can you see the difference here and why I said what I said? Another point is the flying characteristics of the canopy in relation to wingloading. A wingloading around 1.5 would lend better performance and a better training environment on a non-xbraced canopy, where as on a x-braced canopy the performance would be very poor (when compaired to the same wingloading/size non-xbraced). This could lend to developing a bad skill set that could prove dangerous when downsizing to more of a x-braced wingloading (the 2.0:1 range).--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
andy2 0 #18 July 21, 2003 negative recovery arc means that without input the canopy will stay in a dive, driving the pilot into the ground? A positive recovery arc refers to the canopy's natural ability to pull itself out of a dive after initial riser input has been given, thus making it easier to "dig oneself out of the corner". Is this correct? --------------------------------------------- let my inspiration flow, in token rhyme suggesting rhythm... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #19 July 21, 2003 After 450 Elliptical jumps and 200+ on an elliptical canopy with a negitive recovery arc I'm extremely glad I learned on a canopy with a positive recovery. Just learning the difference between 550 feet (safe to do a 180 altitude) and 525 (break the legs turn) took 100+ jumps. On the canopies that I was jumping that I could turn at 350 feet it was easier to judge the arc since I had a better sight picture. Another thing is I've noticed Crossbraced canopies take less toggle input to fly the landings same as an elliptical. The elliptical is more sensitive, but the crossbraced has a much smaller sweet spot for the swoop and that takes a lot more skill to get to. At too low of an experience level it can just get frusrtraing to try and find that all the time. (I hated my Jedei for the first 50 jumps since its got a small window also)Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hookitt 1 #20 July 21, 2003 QuoteNo I wouldn't.. lol Yes you would , just not politely My grammar sometimes resembles that of magnetic refrigerator poetry... Ghetto Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RichM 0 #21 July 21, 2003 Quotenegative recovery arc means that without input the canopy will stay in a dive, driving the pilot into the ground? A positive recovery arc refers to the canopy's natural ability to pull itself out of a dive after initial riser input has been given, thus making it easier to "dig oneself out of the corner". Is this correct? My understanding is that a canopy with a negative recovery arc will return to a steeper glide angle at the end of a swoop, than its normal natural glide angle. A positive recovery arc is a canopy that returns a flatter glide, some canopies will apparently plane themselves out to begin with although I have not jumped any of these. I don't believe the recovery arc has any significant impact on the ability to dig out of the corner. If you are in the corner you started your swoop too low, the longer it takes you to realise this the less height you have to save yourself, and the more you have to dig out and hope the canopy doesn't stall. I don't know if there is any correlation between recovery arc and a canopys high speed deep brake stall characteristics, maybe someone more knowledgeable can comment. A bonus of a long dive is that you start the swoop higher, you have longer in the dive to assess your accuracy and tune the dive rate to suit, and longer to realise you fucked it up. The downside is a long diving canopy will pick up more speed, so if you have royally fucked it up it will hurt you more when you bounce.Rich M Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManBird 0 #22 July 22, 2003 Quotewhy would the crossbraced canopy toss you in your ass any more than an elliptical loaded the same?If wingloading was all that determined the way a canopy flies, there would be no need for different types of parachutes. Take a rigid, elliptical, cross-braced wing with a steep attack angle, wide aspect ratio, and slim profile and load it up the same as a seven cell F-111 square canopy with a huge open nose. Those are two drastically different airfoils. The slimmer, rigid wing will cut the through air and eat altitude a LOT faster than something that induces drag and doesn't pressurize well, even at lower wingloadings. I see people with a lot less jumps than me, and that's not a lot, that fly cross-braced or airlocked canopies and think it's no big deal because they're only loading their canopy at 1.3:1. One of these people has already broke his back once. There is a reason why Performance Designs does not want you to have a Velocity when you only have 200 jumps, even if you're only going to load it at 1.2:1 (an ideal WL for that experience level), and it's not just because it won't perform as well. A cross-braced canopy will eat more altitude in a dive than any low-timer can properly judge, at any wingloading, guaranteed. The people I know that made it through flying a X-braced canopy at low numbers took it very easy, and hurt themselves along the way. I'm just under 600 jumps, and I'm nowhere near ready to try to start judging a 700 foot dive. 400, I can do right now. Maybe in another 500 jumps I'll know what 700 feet looks like. Maybe never. Buying or flying a cross-braced canopy before you've maxed out everything under it is, IMO, nothing more than a vanity decision. Buy a cross-braced canopy and load it at 2.0 only when you've perfected every aspect of flight on your highly elliptical nine-cell loaded at 1.8 or 1.9. Then, you will actually have a valid reason. Take it easy. I'm getting really damn tired of reading about fatalities and injuries of people that died in vain. It's really damn sad."¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManBird 0 #23 July 22, 2003 QuoteA bonus of a long dive is that you start the swoop higher, you have longer in the dive to assess your accuracy and tune the dive rate to suit, and longer to realise you fucked it up. The downside is a long diving canopy will pick up more speed, so if you have royally fucked it up it will hurt you more when you bounce.The bonus to the long dive is that you build up more momentum. I don't know how much you've flown a divey canopy, but they are NOT easy to dig out. A canopy that likes to dive takes a LOT more effort to plane out quickly than one that likes to plane out on its own. Not that it's impossible or anything, it happens all the time. But, a stiletto turned 30 feet too low will be much easier to flatten out quickly than a Velocity turned 30 feet too low, based simply on the momentum behind the dive. More momentum, more speed, more distance needed to stop."¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RichM 0 #24 July 24, 2003 QuoteQuoteA bonus of a long dive is that you start the swoop higher, you have longer in the dive to assess your accuracy and tune the dive rate to suit, and longer to realise you fucked it up. The downside is a long diving canopy will pick up more speed, so if you have royally fucked it up it will hurt you more when you bounce.The bonus to the long dive is that you build up more momentum. I don't know how much you've flown a divey canopy, but they are NOT easy to dig out. A canopy that likes to dive takes a LOT more effort to plane out quickly than one that likes to plane out on its own. Not that it's impossible or anything, it happens all the time. But, a stiletto turned 30 feet too low will be much easier to flatten out quickly than a Velocity turned 30 feet too low, based simply on the momentum behind the dive. More momentum, more speed, more distance needed to stop. I jump a xfire1 and have a number of jumps on a velocity, so I'm no expert. Would you think that if you turn a Sabre 30ft too low at 200ft and realise halfway through the dive you only have 100ft left to dig it out, but if you trun a Velocity 30ft too low at 500ft and realise halfway through you have 250ft to dig it out - with 250ft left you could probably just tweak the dive to suit, with only 100ft you are more likely to need to dig it out. But my thrust was to reinforce that pilot skill skill is the biggest determining factor by far.Rich M Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ManBird 0 #25 July 24, 2003 Let's assume that you realize that you turned too low at the same height on either canopy. Given the same distance, the amount of time to impact will be shorter on the faster canopy, given a steep enough angle. It'd be unfair otherwise."¯"`-._.-¯) ManBird (¯-._.-´"¯" Click Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites