Small Canopies

[Marisan 0]

Hi Everyone first post.
I've been out of the sport for a long time (18+ years) but jumped for 15 years and did roughly 2,500 jumps.
I started in the old B4/C9 days, progressed through a Thunderbolt, Rope and Rings Stratostar (3rd in my club) to a 220 sq ft Pegasus when I finally hung up my rig.
I was reasonable at RW, CRW and Accuracy.

I've been looking through the Incidents thread and it appears that a large number of Fatalities/Injuries are caused through the small canopies that are jumped today.

Now for the controversial bit (Head down preparing for flaming) Why would anyone jump a canopy that having line twists on opening result in a high speed spinning mal. Where hard toggle inputs can result in the same. Where a low turn results in Injury/Death.

While the Freefall part of the jump seem to have got safer (Mandatory Reserve Automatic Openers and Reserve Static Lines) the Canopy Ride (Where I used to relax and enjoy) appears to have gotten more dangerous.

Just some musing from an boring old fart who has never forgotten the sport

[linestretch 0]

you know, maybe it's just something you have to experience to understand. Like trying to explain why skydiving is soo much fun w/ all the added risks.

Driving a station wagon may seem fun until you've driven say a ferrari.

my pics & stuff!

[Reginald 0]

Note that not everyone jumps a tiny canopy. There are plenty of people jumping relativly large canopies still.

"We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things." CP

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

Now for the controversial bit (Head down preparing for flaming) Why would anyone jump a canopy that having line twists on opening result in a high speed spinning mal. Where hard toggle inputs can result in the same. Where a low turn results in Injury/Death.

Because it makes landing at least as much fun as the freefall portion of the jump.

[davelepka 4]

Quote

Why would anyone jump a canopy that having line twists on opening result in a high speed spinning mal. Where hard toggle inputs can result in the same. Where a low turn results in Injury/Death.

Small canopies work fine, provided you operate them properly.

Quote

I started in the old B4/C9 days, progressed through a Thunderbolt, Rope and Rings Stratostar (3rd in my club) to a 220 sq ft Pegasus

Why did you switch from a round to a square? A round would be more reliable. Why did you drop the Thuderbolt? What made you switch to a canopy with a slider?

It's the same reason people jump high performance canopies. They work better. Yes, they are more complex, and take training and experience to operate, but if used correctly, they work better.

They are also worlds more fun than big canopies. Ripping a nice 450 and laying down a long swoop is a reason to skydive in itself.

[in2jumping 0]

Quote

***

Why did you switch from a round to a square? A round would be more reliable. Why did you drop the Thuderbolt? What made you switch to a canopy with a slider?

That is an awful analogy! Changes made above made the sport safer.

Quote

***
It's the same reason people jump high performance canopies. They work better. Yes, they are more complex, and take training and experience to operate, but if used correctly, they work better.

How does a Velocity loaded to 2.0 work any better than a Spectre loaded to 1.2?

Quote

***
They are also worlds more fun than big canopies. Ripping a nice 450 and laying down a long swoop is a reason to skydive in itself.

That is pretty much the only reason I see to jump a small HP canopy, they are fun and exhilarating to fly and land. But come at a high risk and have become one of the most dangerous aspects of the sport today.

[billvon 3,006]

> Small canopies work fine, provided you operate them properly.

Yes. But given people of equal skill, larger canopies are still safer than smaller canopies 90% of the time.

> Why did you switch from a round to a square?

I've jumped both, and squares are just plain safer. They land you far more softly and are more likely to land you in a safe area. Heck, even under a perfectly fine round, you have a not-insignificant chance of injury.

>It's the same reason people jump high performance canopies. They work
> better.

A Sabre2 "works better" than a Unit. But a Sabre2 190 will land you safely more often than a Sabre2 99 will.

That is not to say that you should jump a 190 instead of a 99. But the argument that "it's safer" doesn't fly. They are more dangerous, and more minor problems (like a premature brake release) can result in reserve rides (or more serious problems.) As long as you are OK with that - then no problem.

[davelepka 4]

Quote

Why did you switch from a round to a square? A round would be more reliable. Why did you drop the Thuderbolt? What made you switch to a canopy with a slider?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That is an awful analogy! Changes made above made the sport safer.

Eventually. When they first came out squares, and other 'wings' were cutting edge, borderline experimental, and far off the standard of the day (military surplus rounds).

Quote

They work better. Yes, they are more complex, and take training and experience to operate, but if used correctly, they work better.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


How does a Velocity loaded to 2.0 work any better than a Spectre loaded to 1.2?

For one thing, the Velo has a greater range of speed. I can almost as slow as larger canopies, but also have the ability to let it fly, and quickly position myself in the sky. For my purposes, this a big advantage.

Additionally, the Velo performs better when the winds pick up.

Finally, I can get a Velo to do 70 MPH, and swoop for 300 feet.

When I make a skydive, I value the superior manuverability, forward drive into the wind, and speed/swoop capability. A Spectre at 1.2 cannot meet my needs in these areas.

Your requirements for a canopy may be different than mine.

Quote

they are fun and exhilarating to fly and land. But come at a high risk and have become one of the most dangerous aspects of the sport today.

I have probably written more posts to that effect than any other subject. These canopies are not for everyone. If you take the time to follow a slow and methodical course of training and downsizing over 1000+ jumps, you will reduce your risk in spending time under a small Hp wing.

This thread was about the reasons TO jump a small canopy. If you want to discuss the reasons NOT to jump a small canopy, start up a new thread, and we'll talk about it over there.

[Meux 0]

Hey,

Welcome back, looking forward to jumping with you somewhere.

MH

[davelepka 4]

Quote

But the argument that "it's safer" doesn't fly

I never said it was safer. I said it was better, and for me, it is. The reason being that I want to swoop, and the Velo swoops better than other canopies.

My point about switching from a round to a square was that at the time squares came out, their usefulness had not been proven, but the prospect of steering and flaring appealed to jumpers, so they tried the 'new' technology.

Going fast and swooping appeals to me, so I jump the new technology of a Velo. Maybe the OP will see the correlation, and then be more able to understand why people jump small canopies (which was his question in the first place).

[fcajump 164]

Welcome back "old skydiver"...
Because we now have many "bold skydivers"...

Unfortunately there is also a recent trend to hold the large/slow/conservative/student canopy flier as equals in the responsibility when a fast canopy collides with a slow canopy on a straight in final after standard pattern.

Asbestos jumpsuit ON, welder's helmet down and locked

JW
"Older skydiver"
Spectre 230 loaded ~1.2:1

Always remember that some clouds are harder than others...

[gearless_chris 1]

I'm getting the flamethrower out for ya I hope people actually know the fast canopies have to watch out for the slow ones and are just posting otherwise to keep arguments going.
For the original poster I skydive for the exits from the plane and the canopy flight. I could care less for the freefall as far as turning points go. I do video so I can pull higher to get more canopy time.

"If it wasn't easy stupid people couldn't do it", Duane.

My momma said I could be anything I wanted when I grew up, so I became an a$$hole.

[TheCaptain 2]

Quote

I'm getting the flamethrower out for ya I hope people actually know the fast canopies have to watch out for the slow ones and are just posting otherwise to keep arguments going.

Off subject
Yes, low and slow have the right of way; however it is everyones job to fly a predictable pattern and keep their head on a swival while in the air and until they are off the landing area. Many times I have seen large canopies fly their pattern right over the top of the landing area and doing "s" turns on final.
Kirk

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

Welcome back "old skydiver"...
Because we now have many "bold skydivers"...

Unfortunately there is also a recent trend to hold the large/slow/conservative/student canopy flier as equals in the responsibility when a fast canopy collides with a slow canopy on a straight in final after standard pattern.

Asbestos jumpsuit ON, welder's helmet down and locked

JW
"Older skydiver"
Spectre 230 loaded ~1.2:1

Anytime you leap out of an airplane and intend to land with any type of parachute it is your responsibility to do it safely. No matter WHAT parachute you're jumping.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[Lastchance 0]

Some of us still do enjoy that canopy ride and some of us still do not feel the need to fly a canopy the size of posage stamp. Fast and zippy is good for some but not for all. I will stay with my current 1:1 wing loading for the duration of my skydiving career I'm guessing.

I may be getting old but I got to see all the cool bands.

[dharma1976 0]

Quote

Anytime you leap out of an airplane and intend to land with any type of parachute it is your responsibility to do it safely. No matter WHAT parachute you're jumping.

I just feel that what JP said needs to be repeated...

insert repetition of what JP said..

Dave

http://www.skyjunky.com

CSpenceFLY - I can't believe the number of people willing to bet their life on someone else doing the right thing.

[craigbey 0]

Quote

Anytime you leap out of an airplane and intend to land with any type of parachute it is your responsibility to do it safely. No matter WHAT parachute you're jumping.

+1

... bump!

Four years and the OP has still not been able to ban those 'dangerous' canopies he doesn't like.

[Marisan 0]

Quote

Quote

Anytime you leap out of an airplane and intend to land with any type of parachute it is your responsibility to do it safely. No matter WHAT parachute you're jumping.

+1

... bump!

Four years and the OP has still not been able to ban those 'dangerous' canopies he doesn't like.

Hey craigbey, And how many people have died under these small canopies in that 4 years eh?

[craigbey 0]

Well then ... maybe you should work harder to try to get them banned. Better hurry.

Or, you can work with others to provide better CC training. According to your story, you used to do it. And in 2 other threads, you have now agreed that "it's the pilot, not the canopy".

So, what have you done in those 4 years to help with CC training? Have you taken a CC class yourself in that time? With all your experience, perhaps you could help teach one?

[Marisan 0]

Quote

Well then ... maybe you should work harder to try to get them banned. Better hurry.

Or, you can work with others to provide better CC training. According to your story, you used to do it. And in 2 other threads, you have now agreed that "it's the pilot, not the canopy".

So, what have you done in those 4 years to help with CC training? Have you taken a CC class yourself in that time? With all your experience, perhaps you could help teach one?

If you'd read the first post on this thread you would see that I haven't jumped for a long time.

So why don't YOU start to help with CC Training.

Re getting them banned, I wouldn't worry about me. I'd worry about the FAA.

What, exactly, is your problem with someone pointing out the carnage?

Do you have too much of your ego or money invested in HP Canopies?

[craigbey 0]

Quote

If you'd read the first post on this thread you would see that I haven't jumped for a long time.

So why don't YOU start to help with CC Training.

Re getting them banned, I wouldn't worry about me. I'd worry about the FAA.

What, exactly, is your problem with someone pointing out the carnage?

Do you have too much of your ego or money invested in HP Canopies?

Many of us are participating in CC training ... even if it is only as students. I am a student of advanced canopy flight, therefore I seek out additional instruction from more experienced canopy pilots. How's that for ego?

And guess what, when I looked, the training was available. That's why I'm not concerned about your empty FAA threat.

Yes, more needs to be done to ensure that everyone gets the proper training at the appropriate time. And some of the training itself needs to be updated and mandated.

I specifically challenged you to do more because I did read your first post. Perhaps you need get more involved with the sport besides trolling.

[Marisan 0]

Quote

Quote

If you'd read the first post on this thread you would see that I haven't jumped for a long time.

So why don't YOU start to help with CC Training.

Re getting them banned, I wouldn't worry about me. I'd worry about the FAA.

What, exactly, is your problem with someone pointing out the carnage?

Do you have too much of your ego or money invested in HP Canopies?

Many of us are participating in CC training ... even if it is only as students. I am a student of advanced canopy flight, therefore I seek out additional instruction from more experienced canopy pilots. How's that for ego?

And guess what, when I looked, the training was available. That's why I'm not concerned about your empty FAA threat.

Yes, more needs to be done to ensure that everyone gets the proper training at the appropriate time. And some of the training itself needs to be updated and mandated.

I specifically challenged you to do more because I did read your first post. Perhaps you need get more involved with the sport besides trolling.

Re my empty FAA Threat:

Older and wiser heads than yours are worried about my empty FAA Threat.

I suggest you read the below, especially Airtwardo's translation about 3/4's of the way down the first page.

(Sorry, can't do clickies)

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4110809;search_string=FAA%20Letter;#4110809

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

If you'd read the first post on this thread you would see that I haven't jumped for a long time.

So why don't YOU start to help with CC Training.

Re getting them banned, I wouldn't worry about me. I'd worry about the FAA.

What, exactly, is your problem with someone pointing out the carnage?

Do you have too much of your ego or money invested in HP Canopies?

Many of us are participating in CC training ... even if it is only as students. I am a student of advanced canopy flight, therefore I seek out additional instruction from more experienced canopy pilots. How's that for ego?

And guess what, when I looked, the training was available. That's why I'm not concerned about your empty FAA threat.

Yes, more needs to be done to ensure that everyone gets the proper training at the appropriate time. And some of the training itself needs to be updated and mandated.

I specifically challenged you to do more because I did read your first post. Perhaps you need get more involved with the sport besides trolling.

Re my empty FAA Threat:

Older and wiser heads than yours are worried about my empty FAA Threat.

I suggest you read the below, especially Airtwardo's translation about 3/4's of the way down the first page.

(Sorry, can't do clickies)

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=4110809;search_string=FAA%20Letter;#4110809

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[Ron 10]

Quote

Why would anyone jump a canopy that having line twists on opening result in a high speed spinning mal. Where hard toggle inputs can result in the same. Where a low turn results in Injury/Death.

Why would someone step out of a perfectly good airplane and risk high speed death if their parachute fails to open?

Why would someone risk death getting onto an airplane? It is much safer to stay on the ground.

Same reasons.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Sangi 0]

Ok I'll chime in (nooo)..

Any canopy can hurt you or kill you. I screwed myself with a "safe" intermediate canopy on a relatively low wingloading..

Just like in the other thread in the swooping subforum, it's not the canopies, but the pilot that is the issue..

Martisan, please do not be ignorant and full of unreasonable hate and fear, just because you lack the knowledge.. The skydiving world has changed a lot since you stopped, so now you just have to accept the way it is or go away from it.. It wont change according to your mindset and wishes..

Please listen to some reasonable people with up to date knowledge and good reason and don't dwell on the past nor live on it..

If you have the question "why would or why do we do what we do, which increases danger" then you don't seem too different from an ignorant wuffo, simply cause he lacks the knowledge and understanding..

Not trying to bash, I'm trying to say, learn and try to understand

"Dream as you'll live forever, live as you'll die today." James Dean