Canopy photo

[justinhawxhurst 0]

Just thought I would post this shot of the front of my canopy rolling under. Turbulance is a thing to keep in mind. I did not feel this but the photo just happend to be taken at the right time.

justin

[LetsGoOutside 0]

Are you giving it some aggressive front riser input? Looks more like that than turbulence.

[justinhawxhurst 0]

What i think is that it is the moment I droped the front riser. But there was a lot of turbulance. this is actualy a gl flight and the final turn is 200m off the roof of a building with a metal roof with a lot of hot air coming off the roof.

I have had some flights that are actuelly scary with the hot roof under me.

There could be so many reasons but I liked the photo how it shows that the wings we fly are not solid and can do some wierd things.

[Remster 30]

Quote

What i think is that it is the moment I droped the front riser.

Actually, it looks like your right hand is still pulling the right riser fairly hard. The risers on the left on more or less level, while the right front is much lower than the rear.

Remster

[yoink 321]

I still don't understand why people insist on flying skydiving gear in places where they are highly likely to encounter turbulence.

If you keep doing this, it will bite you. Particularly if you're using front riser inputs.

Get some proper GL gear.

[Zlew 0]

Looks to me mostly like the "step" from heavy front riser input on one side...and your arms in the photo would make that look like it would be the possible.

Would also explain why you didn't feel it. My bet would be that if you had turbulence do that to your leading edge, you would notice it for sure.

[SRI85 0]

kinda on topic... so ill share this photo.

http://www.skydivingstills.com/Skydiving/2011/Weekend-Pics-6-5-11/17389991_2S2pR5#1321996940_SBJ9Dq4-A-LB

[justinhawxhurst 0]

I have a proper gl rig. I also have about 1000+ gl flights total with 350 this year and 75 more with this canopy this year from this flight. Almos all of the flights are big mountain flights in the French alps.
I know the landing extremely well say 400 flight there. Some days I like to fly my skydiving canopy and some I dont they are 2 dif. wings that do 2 dif. flights.

As for the photo it is really hard to tell wht is going on as I am also on a gl harness and part it is cut off.

If you know what the turbulance is going to do and where it is you can deal with it properly.

Staying heads up and knowing that the canopy does these kinds of things is good to know.

[piisfish 140]

what canopy is that ?

scissors beat paper, paper beat rock, rock beat wingsuit - KarlM

[Calvin19 0]

Quote

I have a proper gl rig. I also have about 1000+ gl flights total with 350 this year and 75 more with this canopy this year from this flight. Almos all of the flights are big mountain flights in the French alps.
I know the landing extremely well say 400 flight there. Some days I like to fly my skydiving canopy and some I dont they are 2 dif. wings that do 2 dif. flights.

As for the photo it is really hard to tell wht is going on as I am also on a gl harness and part it is cut off.

If you know what the turbulance is going to do and where it is you can deal with it properly.

Staying heads up and knowing that the canopy does these kinds of things is good to know.

AgreedAlso, That's a lot of flights.

[Calvin19 0]

Quote

kinda on topic... so ill share this photo.

http://www.skydivingstills.com/Skydiving/2011/Weekend-Pics-6-5-11/17389991_2S2pR5#1321996940_SBJ9Dq4-A-LB

Is this from the wake of another canopy a few seconds ahead of the pilot in this photo? a wake is really the only thing that could cause that kind of turbulence that low to the ground.

[ianmdrennan 2]

Raeford is notoriously turbulent. It's surrounded by a large tree line.

Performance Designs Factory Team

[Calvin19 0]

or that... but what kind of wind was there?

[SRI85 0]

it was a pretty calm day, on that load and at that moment, the winds had picked up to about 20mph out of nowhere, caused most of the load to land off.

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

kinda on topic... so ill share this photo.

http://www.skydivingstills.com/Skydiving/2011/Weekend-Pics-6-5-11/17389991_2S2pR5#1321996940_SBJ9Dq4-A-LB

That is what is known as the Dragon at Raeford.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[virgin-burner 1]

Quote

Quote

kinda on topic... so ill share this photo.

http://www.skydivingstills.com/Skydiving/2011/Weekend-Pics-6-5-11/17389991_2S2pR5#1321996940_SBJ9Dq4-A-LB

That is what is known as the Dragon at Raeford.

that is because it bites you in the ass before it burns you into the ground, right!?

that is one scare pic..

“Some may never live, but the crazy never die.”
-Hunter S. Thompson
"No. Try not. Do... or do not. There is no try."
-Yoda

[davelepka 4]

Quote

If you know what the turbulance is going to do

Have you looked up the word 'turbulence' lately?

tur·bu·lence   /ˈtɜrbyələns/ Show Spelled[tur-byuh-luhns] Show IPA
noun
1. the quality or state of being turbulent; violent disorder or commotion.
2. Hydraulics . the haphazard secondary motion caused by eddies within a moving fluid.
3. Meteorology . irregular motion of the atmosphere, as that indicated by gusts and lulls in the wind.


I added the bold to highlight my point. None of those words contributes to anyone 'knowing' what turbulence is doing. Don't fool yourself into thinking that you do.

[Calvin19 0]

Quote

Quote

If you know what the turbulance is going to do

Have you looked up the word 'turbulence' lately?

tur·bu·lence   /ˈtɜrbyələns/ Show Spelled[tur-byuh-luhns] Show IPA
noun
1. the quality or state of being turbulent; violent disorder or commotion.
2. Hydraulics . the haphazard secondary motion caused by eddies within a moving fluid.
3. Meteorology . irregular motion of the atmosphere, as that indicated by gusts and lulls in the wind.


I added the bold to highlight my point. None of those words contributes to anyone 'knowing' what turbulence is doing. Don't fool yourself into thinking that you do.

While I appreciate the lesson in vocabulary, and in some ways I agree, I personally use the predictable forms of turbulence A LOT. I soar sailplanes and my airplane in the wave, I use convective turbulence to thermal my paragliders, I use mechanical turbulence to soar my speed gliders. When close formation flying I use "wake turbulence" to my advantage and know where it will be and what it does to my airplane. Of course, heir on the side of caution. At my landing strip I know where the rollers are off the hangars and trees, I know where there is valley flow, I know where there will be drainage. The trick is to fly so that you have an out either way, if the 'turbulence' is there or not.

You could argue that those are not 'turbulence' but predictable forms of airmass movement or "sink"and "lift" but in aviation it seems to me the two can be fairly easily interchanged, just need to adapt the vehicle and flying style.

-SPACE-

[davelepka 4]

Most of your examples involve rigid wing aircraft where there is no concern of the wing collapsing (except I guess in severe turbulence, where the rigid wing might fail).

In your paraglider example, you're talking about flight a little higher off the ground than the OPs example. A canopy collapse at altitude is no big deal. When it happens at 20ft, it can be a very big deal. According the OP, the pic was taken right off the deck in the LZ of that launch point.

How about this - thinking you 'know' what turbulence will do or how your canopy will react, when close to the ground is a very bad idea and most likely will not end well.

[Calvin19 0]

Quote

Most of your examples involve rigid wing aircraft where there is no concern of the wing collapsing (except I guess in severe turbulence, where the rigid wing might fail).

In your paraglider example, you're talking about flight a little higher off the ground than the OPs example. A canopy collapse at altitude is no big deal. When it happens at 20ft, it can be a very big deal. According the OP, the pic was taken right off the deck in the LZ of that launch point.

How about this - thinking you 'know' what turbulence will do or how your canopy will react, when close to the ground is a very bad idea and most likely will not end well.

I fly paragliders and speed wings VERY close to the ground on a regular basis. and it is absolutely the most dangerous place for 'turbulence', as well as the least predictable. Usually, and I'm not pointing fingers here because the OP seems to know his shit, but usually the skydiver-turned-speed glider pilot is 99-100% ignorant of micrometeorology as it pertains to flying foot launched gliders off mountains and hills. 2 years ago there was huge surge of skydivers buying speed wings and breaking their ankle on the same hill. It was a monthly occurrence. Awesome used speed glider deals everywhere. It was all because kids would get to the hill and say "huh, looks fine" and would go fly. little did they know it was honking over the back (guilty of this myself back in the day) or the thermals are so sharp and nasty even the expert PG pilots are taking a break. (Even speed gliders need to be 'actively flown' in "turbulence", which is not turbulence at all to the paraglider pilot. Just "active air" that can be used to get high). I for one have 700+ ground launched small canopy flights, half of those more than 2000', I have flown anything from a JVX to a BASE canopy to a skate8 to a little cloud 16, and I have never had a collapse on any of those when foot launching.

SO, what I am saying is, if you do not know how to predict the air conditions, if you do not know how to PREDICT THE TURBULENCE and deal with it, you should probably not be flying that day.

[mattpark 0]

The dropzone I jump at is in a valley with trees on top of the hills. When the winds pick up and come across the hills, you have to be heads up or sit on the ground. Otherwise the valley will eat you alive.