eli4247 0 #1 July 27, 2003 The ad for the firebolt canopy states that it has a bottom layer constructed of PN-1, for smaller pack volume and strength. What is this PN-1? ive heard that it is another name for f-111, is this true? also ive heard that it may just be a lower porosity material but not f-111. if any one can help me with this question it would be appriciated . thanks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
darkvapor 0 #2 July 27, 2003 This might help. http://www.blue-fabric.com/sports_fabric_specs.html According to those specs, it is 0-3cfm, which would put it in the same class as F111. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NightJumper 0 #3 July 27, 2003 If you are coming to Ranroul stop by the Jump Shack tent and demo one. We will have plenty available, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #4 July 28, 2003 QuoteIf you are coming to Ranroul stop by the Jump Shack tent and demo one. We will have plenty available, I'm guessing that you're in a position to answer this question; what is the impact of the 0-3CFM bottom skin to the expected life cycle of this canopy? Will this canopy last as long as an all ZP canopy? I would imagine that when the bottom skin begins to wear out that the canopy will feel lose pressurization and begin to feel sort of mushy. Am I wrong? - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NightJumper 0 #5 July 28, 2003 Quotewhat is the impact of the 0-3CFM bottom skin to the expected life cycle of this canopy? It extends the life cycle. QuoteWill this canopy last as long as an all ZP canopy? Yes/ 2,000+ jumps per canopy are typical QuoteI would imagine that when the bottom skin begins to wear out that the canopy will feel lose pressurization and begin to feel sort of mushy. Am I wrong? There has been no premature degradation of the bottom skin or its performance. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #6 July 28, 2003 QuoteIt extends the life cycle. How? I can't imagine that having a fabric known for significant degradition over time would extend the life cycle of a modern canopy. Please explain this to me. QuoteThere has been no premature degradation of the bottom skin or its performance. No premature degradition when compared to other 0-3CFM materials? No performance degradation when one takes into account the pourus bottom skin? - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
darkvapor 0 #7 July 28, 2003 QuoteI can't imagine that having a fabric known for significant degradition over time would extend the life cycle of a modern canopy. Please explain this to me. I would like to know the same. (See website with the specs I posted earlier). For all intensive purposes, PN1 is "standard F111" and PN4 is "standard ZP". How can PN1 have similar wear properties to ZP when it is lighter weave (about 10-12% lighter), over 10% thinner, and 2.5 times weaker in tear strength? If I am missing something here, I encourage you to educate me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NightJumper 0 #8 July 28, 2003 As ZP ages it becomes brittle and is more susceptible to catastrophic failure than F-111. Also it is the top skin that produces your lift. And after about 50 jumps the ZP no longer has zero permeability. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #9 July 28, 2003 So how would it EXTEND the life cycle if the top skin is still zp? You saidQuoteIt extends the life cycle. AndQuoteAs ZP ages it becomes brittle and is more susceptible to catastrophic failure than F-111. Also it is the top skin that produces your lift. So if it still has a ZP top...how does the bottom EXTEND the life?....And as you said lift is produced by the TOP skin.... I think we gotcha."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #10 July 28, 2003 QuoteAlso it is the top skin that produces your lift. While it may be the top skin that generates lift, isn't the bottom skin required to maintain pressurization of the canopy? No pressurization, no canopy, right? QuoteAnd after about 50 jumps the ZP no longer has zero permeability. That's interesting. Can you provide me with evidence to back this claim up? Even if you can simply provide numbers without a source I'm interested in seeing them. Thanks, looking forward to your answers. - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
darkvapor 0 #11 July 28, 2003 QuoteAs ZP ages it becomes brittle and is more susceptible to catastrophic failure than F-111. Can you cite some evidence? It's not everyday that I hear about catastrophic failure of ZP material compared to F111 material. Define "brittle." Polyamides (nylons) do not exhibit "brittle" behavior, as far as I know. I can certainly be wrong about it, since I am not a materials or textile engineer. (Again, see my comparison of PN1 to PN4 material properties). QuoteAnd after about 50 jumps the ZP no longer has zero permeability. With that logic, shouldn't F111 degrade ATLEAST the same as ZP in that first 50 jumps? My guess is that the use of PN1 is primarily an economic one. PN1 is going to be much cheaper than PN4. So that the profits per canopy outweigh the performance decrease. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NightJumper 0 #12 July 28, 2003 QuoteWhile it may be the top skin that generates lift, isn't the bottom skin required to maintain pressurization of the canopy? No pressurization, no canopy, right? It is all about the airflow over the top of the wing (top skin). The amount of "pressurization" needed is insignificant in comparision with either materials capibility. QuoteThat's interesting. Can you provide me with evidence to back this claim up? Even if you can simply provide numbers without a source I'm interested to hear them. Sure, come to my loft with any canopy you want and we will take permeability samples on a certified Permeometer and you can look at the fabric under a video inspection microscope. Then you can see the results for yourself. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kolla 0 #13 July 28, 2003 Hmmm, I'd also like to see the study on that (where a zero porosity fabric) ceases to be zero porosity after approx. 50 jumps. I was under the impression that it stayed ZP for quite a bit longer than that. How much does it degrade? And if it's already degraded after 50 jumps, how does that fabric hold up after 100 jumps, 500 jumps etc? Thanks! KollaBlue Skies Magazine Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #14 July 28, 2003 QuoteIt is all about the airflow over the top of the wing (top skin). The amount of "pressurization" needed is insignificant in comparision with either materials capibility. It may be insignificant, but it is required, is this correct? It stands to reason then, I think, that as the bottom skin fabric degrades that performance of the canopy will degrade as well. QuoteSure, come to my loft with any canopy you want and we will take permeability samples on a certified Permeometer and you can look at the fabric under a video inspection microscope. Then you can see the results for yourself. Well now, you know I'm not going to come to your loft, or at least that it isn't likely. You've got the machine there and apparently a video microscope as well. Could you post the numbers from the machine and stills from the microscope? - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hooknswoop 19 #15 July 28, 2003 I am very confused. Does the Firebolt use the same fabric as the Silhouette from PD? If so, then the Silhouette should be out lasting all other ZP canopies. It is well known that a ZP canopy will outlast an F-111 canopy (forgive the ZP/F-111 terms, it is just easier to use them). How would using an F-111 bottom skin extend the life of a canopy? Pressurization is very important to a canopy, especially for landing. The more pressure that is bled out through the fabric, the less it retains it shape and it's effective surface area goes down. This results in a higher real wing loading and higher stall speed, which translates into having to run it out more. Derek Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #16 July 28, 2003 Still waiting on how it EXTENDS the life? And I will come by your shop on a weekend if it is required for you to explain it to me. Ron"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #17 July 28, 2003 F-111 is a brand name that has become the common trade name for low porosity fabrics. Kinda like Band-Aid. PN-1 is a low porosity (i.e. NOT Zero P)---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #18 July 28, 2003 QuoteAnd after about 50 jumps the ZP no longer has zero permeability. I seriously doubt you can back this statement up with any fact. No matter what is printed in a brochure, or spouted at an exposition it will not change physics, durability, or performance.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #19 July 28, 2003 Wow - I never thought I would hear an argument that F-111 outlasts ZP, but I'm sure I have less understanding of it than anyone that's posted so far. I would like to make sure I understand the different technologies. Please correct if anything I say below in wrong. I thought that F-111 is the older of the two types. The fabric has a weave that allows some air through. As the canopy ages, the threads of the weave separate and the canopy loses lift because air flows through it. All but (I believe) one modern reserve canopy is made from F-111. ZP is pretty much the same fabric as F-111, but with a coating applied that keeps air from coming through the weave, and helps hold the threads together to prevent degradation of the material. ZP is more susceptible to "catastrophic failure", because they far outlast F-111. Take two canopies, one F-111 and one ZP - the ZP will go for hundreds or thousands more jumps before a cell(s) finally rip open. An F-111 will never make it that far because by that many jumps, it has lost too much lift to be useful. A "hybrid" is a ZP topskin and an F-111 bottom skin (or vice-versa), which is what this canopy sounds like. The topskin takes more of the force of lift, while the bottom skin is required more for cell pressurization. Without both the topskin and the bottomskin, the cell will not inflate and you have a canopy that doesn't fly. I always thought the point of a hybrid was to make canopies easier to pack. Now, can anyone confirm the rumor that this canopy is named after Harry Potter's broomstick? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davelepka 4 #20 July 29, 2003 That all sounds correct. While there have been some interesting claims in this thread regarding this canopy, and it's construction, durablilty and performance, I'm interested to hear if any impartiel jumpers have actaully jumped thisa thing, and what were their impressions. It would be relevent to know their jump numbers and canopy expereince, along with the wing loading and approx. number of jumps on the canopy they jumped. The one thing I cannot get past, is that, to my knowledge, there are only a few hybrid canopies in production, and they are all fairly "low performance". How is it that the idea of a high performance hybrid, which offers extended life, and lower pack volumes, has slippied past all of the bigger canopy manufacturers? It seems to me that if this were a viable idea, it would have been in mainstream production long ago. Oh yeah, the concept that pressurization is not important? Come on, is this guy for real? Note: Riddler, not all of this applies to you, the first line is for you, the rest is just general commentary on the thread. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycat 0 #21 July 29, 2003 QuoteI'm interested to hear if any impartiel jumpers have actaully jumped thisa thing, and what were their impressions. They had been talking to Derek about sending him one after WFFC, I'm sure if they send it and he jumps it he will be sure to post a full report.Fly it like you stole it! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 20 #22 July 29, 2003 I'm going to try to get my hands on one at WFFC so look for a write up after then... Also look for write ups on PD's new canopy, the Vengence, Crossfire2's and what ever anyone else has in a 135 there.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skygod7777 0 #23 July 29, 2003 QuoteThey had been talking to Derek about sending him one after WFFC, I'm sure if they send it and he jumps it he will be sure to post a full report. they've been talking about sending me one since it came out (maybe even before). they wanted me to jump like a 78 or something like that. and now they still want me to try at 90 or something. i may, but i dought it will have the performance i would be looking for in a canopy, but i may be surprized. who knows later Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cobaltdan 0 #24 July 30, 2003 i have tested gelvenor zp fabric on canopies with almost 3000 jumps. the fabric is still significantly lower perosity than substantially new f111. btw for those that do not know, you can measuire porisoty with a porosity meter. basically it is a vertical bellows, you place the fabric to be tested over the mouth of the bellows at the top (about a 3" diameter) and trip the device the bellowas are sealed on the bottom with a weight. the setup uses gravity to suck air through the fabric. as air leaks into the bellows they expand and hang lower. a digital timmer records the time it takes for the bellows to move from the up position to the bottom position. sincerely, dan<><> atair www.extremefly.comDaniel Preston <><> atairaerodynamics.com (sport) atairaerospace.com (military) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
