Zoter 0 #1 August 14, 2005 Couldnt see anything on a search.... Just wanted some opinions from some Birdmen about the suitability of freefly 'puds' ( just the pud...not a pullout system) and flying wingsuits... good idea... bad idea.... doesnt matter.... ???? Thanks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites unclecharlie95 3 #2 August 14, 2005 It has come up before. I have one on my Javelin. They work fine, if: -they are light weight -they do NOT have a single attachment point that the bridle could wrap around hope this helps JBASEstore.it Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites gus 1 #3 August 14, 2005 My Wings pc most definately has a 'gap' between the pud and the apex of the pc where it's attached. It has to or it wouldn't really work. So I suppose the potential is there for the bridle to wrap. GusOutpatientsOnline.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mccordia 74 #4 August 14, 2005 Mine is attached the the piloy-chute over the whole length of the pud, so no snag-option there.... Never had any trouble pulling also (also something I heard a few people claim about 'freefly-puds') I like it a lot over a normal hackey (is that the correct term) when it comes to backflying and such...nothing that can catch wind and pull my pilot out... (quite curious to the neck-breaking aerobatic style-series you'd perform if your chute opened while backflying) But Gus' freefly pub does look like something snag-able yea... Otherwise, fumble around with your bridle and pilot a bit (on the ground, duh:P) and see if you can manage to snag anything...? That might be the best test?JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zoter 0 #5 August 15, 2005 QuoteSo I suppose the potential is there for the bridle to wrap Could you explain here Gus? Is it a higher risk during BM because of the lower pressure 'behind' you meaning your PC is not going to inflate as quickly ...therefore giving more time for the bridal...hackey/pud.....to get wrapped in the bridal? Is it any more 'risk' with a pud than it is with a hackey attached to the bridal in the same way ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Sylvain 0 #6 August 15, 2005 Just wanted to share my experience on this one : I started flying wingsuit a few months ago with my freefly pud equipped rig. It was ok, but I needed to be careful on opening, as the pud (well at least mine) must be grabbed with full hand, not just 3 or 4 fingertips. On some jumps I thought it may be safer to change my pud for a PVC tube or hackey, but didn't do it. Jump 34 : nice 3-way, a bit tired on opening, grabbed the pud with the fingertips (that was the mistake), pulled it out of the BOC, then realized my fingers had slipped form the pud without pulling anything out. Just a few inches of the chute were out of the spandex, with the pud floating at the end of its attachment bridle. I tried to grab the pud, but couldn't find it, so switched to plan B : Red and Silver. The reserve ride was uneventull (just lost the freebag ) After that, I had the freefly pud replaced by a PVC tube. I now feel A LOT more confident when opening time comes. -- Sylvain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites gus 1 #7 August 15, 2005 QuoteCould you explain here Gus? The gap between the pud and the apex of the pc provides a nice place for the bridle to wrap. As per the attached pic. QuoteIs it a higher risk during BM because of the lower pressure 'behind' you meaning your PC is not going to inflate as quickly ...therefore giving more time for the bridal...hackey/pud.....to get wrapped in the bridal? I would say that on wingsuit jumps there's a higher chance of the pc dancing around in your burble and gettings its knickers in a knot. QuoteIs it any more 'risk' with a pud than it is with a hackey attached to the bridal in the same way ? Just on intuition I would say yes. The squareness of the pud seems more snagadelic than the sphere of a hackey. Of course having said all that I still jump mine, I really like it and I have no plans to change it. There may be a (very small) risk but the benefits outweigh it for me. GusOutpatientsOnline.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites audacium 0 #8 August 15, 2005 Hi, I am only jumping with freefly puds and prefer them over hackeysacks. The puds are sewn over the whole length so reduced snag potential here. Puds seems preferrable to me as they present less snag hazard than hackeys (in the door, with other jumpers etc.) and I think they are aerodynamically safer, also for fast rotations etc. Have used puds for couple hundred of jumps now (including a lot of wingsuit) and never had a problem on pull time. Also, I would not see why a pud should be harder to pull than a PVC. I agree that a hackey is sometimes easier to grab, but again, if you are not sure then do a couple hundred of practice pull on the ground and you have a good chance of grabbing it right on pull time :). All the best, Eduard. -- Eduard Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites The111 1 #9 August 15, 2005 QuoteMy Wings pc most definately has a 'gap' between the pud and the apex of the pc where it's attached. It has to or it wouldn't really work. I don't understand this statement. Why wouldn't it still work with two attachment points, without a gap?www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites gus 1 #10 August 16, 2005 QuoteI don't understand this statement. Why wouldn't it still work with two attachment points, without a gap? Without that gap you could have either (a) pc completely in boc but pud flapping in breeze or (b) pub securely tucked under flap of container but apex of pc peeking out the boc. That seems to be the case with my Wings anyway. What do you mean by two attachment points, one at either end of the pud rather than one central one? I don't think that would change anything. GusOutpatientsOnline.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites droquette 0 #11 August 16, 2005 so what is the attachment point like on an Icon? I am about to order a new rig which I plan to use for freefly and wingsuit. I want a Pud, but after reading this thread am confused. Any comments are appreciated. Thanks, DanHISPA 72 ----- "Muff Brother" 3733 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mccordia 74 #12 August 16, 2005 A buddy of mine has an Icon container and it has a 'normal' freefly pud With 'normal' I mean a completely attached pud, (bird-man-suitable would be the term you're looking for probably) Not attached at the bottom of your pilot by a cord like a pull-out pud like Gus' I've never seen one of those up-close...I think most new containers/pilots have a 'correct' freefly-pud (mine also does)JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites gus 1 #13 August 16, 2005 Jarno you couldn't post a pic of yours could you? GusOutpatientsOnline.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mccordia 74 #14 August 16, 2005 QuoteJarno you couldn't post a pic of yours could you? Gus Dude...carefull what you ask over the internet.. My rig is away for a repack, but I'll take a snapshot of it as soon as I get it back (saterday)JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skymedic 0 #15 August 16, 2005 My new wings pilot chute with free fly pud and all of my wings freefly puds are attached by a single peace of what looks like type 3 binding tape with about a half inch gap from the pud to the apex of the pilot chute. I did have a nasty pilot chute in knot incident not too long ago due to this....the bridle didn't knot up but the whole pilot chute did. Marc otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cpoxon 0 #16 August 16, 2005 QuoteI don't understand this statement. Why wouldn't it still work with two attachment points, without a gap? Because on the Wings handle the stiffener is wedged under the flap that closes around the bottom of the container. If the handle was sown all across the apex, there would be no flap to wedge, unless it was sown half way up and a crease put in it. I think this is where the confusion is arising; I have seen newer Javelin's with pud style handles that are sown to the top of the pilot chute but they are solely contained in the BOC and do not use the side flap to wedge it?Skydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tr027 0 #17 August 16, 2005 Only thing that's annoying me is people are referring to their handle as a PUD, when they really mean BOC method with a freefly handle. PUD is not the name of a handle, it's the name of a deployment method, just like you wouldn't say 'uh, yeah, im using the BOC handle on my rig now, it's alot better'. Handle has nothing to do with deployment method, theyre 2 separate animals, and PUD method is highly discouraged for WS. Sorry, had to get that out after seeing so many posts where this was done."The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it. " -John Galt from Atlas Shrugged, 1957 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites cpoxon 0 #18 August 16, 2005 QuotePUD is not the name of a handle, it's the name of a deployment method Really? From the Skydiving Glossary QuotePud. Slang for the handle on a pull out pilot chute system. Skydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tr027 0 #19 August 17, 2005 Really? From the Skydiving Glossary QuotePud. Slang for the handle on a pull out pilot chute system. Aha, tricky, you almost got me there, had me going at first. No, because in this context (which the original post established is not relating to pull-out deployment method) the term doesn't apply. "The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it. " -John Galt from Atlas Shrugged, 1957 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unclecharlie95 3 #2 August 14, 2005 It has come up before. I have one on my Javelin. They work fine, if: -they are light weight -they do NOT have a single attachment point that the bridle could wrap around hope this helps JBASEstore.it Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gus 1 #3 August 14, 2005 My Wings pc most definately has a 'gap' between the pud and the apex of the pc where it's attached. It has to or it wouldn't really work. So I suppose the potential is there for the bridle to wrap. GusOutpatientsOnline.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 74 #4 August 14, 2005 Mine is attached the the piloy-chute over the whole length of the pud, so no snag-option there.... Never had any trouble pulling also (also something I heard a few people claim about 'freefly-puds') I like it a lot over a normal hackey (is that the correct term) when it comes to backflying and such...nothing that can catch wind and pull my pilot out... (quite curious to the neck-breaking aerobatic style-series you'd perform if your chute opened while backflying) But Gus' freefly pub does look like something snag-able yea... Otherwise, fumble around with your bridle and pilot a bit (on the ground, duh:P) and see if you can manage to snag anything...? That might be the best test?JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zoter 0 #5 August 15, 2005 QuoteSo I suppose the potential is there for the bridle to wrap Could you explain here Gus? Is it a higher risk during BM because of the lower pressure 'behind' you meaning your PC is not going to inflate as quickly ...therefore giving more time for the bridal...hackey/pud.....to get wrapped in the bridal? Is it any more 'risk' with a pud than it is with a hackey attached to the bridal in the same way ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sylvain 0 #6 August 15, 2005 Just wanted to share my experience on this one : I started flying wingsuit a few months ago with my freefly pud equipped rig. It was ok, but I needed to be careful on opening, as the pud (well at least mine) must be grabbed with full hand, not just 3 or 4 fingertips. On some jumps I thought it may be safer to change my pud for a PVC tube or hackey, but didn't do it. Jump 34 : nice 3-way, a bit tired on opening, grabbed the pud with the fingertips (that was the mistake), pulled it out of the BOC, then realized my fingers had slipped form the pud without pulling anything out. Just a few inches of the chute were out of the spandex, with the pud floating at the end of its attachment bridle. I tried to grab the pud, but couldn't find it, so switched to plan B : Red and Silver. The reserve ride was uneventull (just lost the freebag ) After that, I had the freefly pud replaced by a PVC tube. I now feel A LOT more confident when opening time comes. -- Sylvain Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gus 1 #7 August 15, 2005 QuoteCould you explain here Gus? The gap between the pud and the apex of the pc provides a nice place for the bridle to wrap. As per the attached pic. QuoteIs it a higher risk during BM because of the lower pressure 'behind' you meaning your PC is not going to inflate as quickly ...therefore giving more time for the bridal...hackey/pud.....to get wrapped in the bridal? I would say that on wingsuit jumps there's a higher chance of the pc dancing around in your burble and gettings its knickers in a knot. QuoteIs it any more 'risk' with a pud than it is with a hackey attached to the bridal in the same way ? Just on intuition I would say yes. The squareness of the pud seems more snagadelic than the sphere of a hackey. Of course having said all that I still jump mine, I really like it and I have no plans to change it. There may be a (very small) risk but the benefits outweigh it for me. GusOutpatientsOnline.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
audacium 0 #8 August 15, 2005 Hi, I am only jumping with freefly puds and prefer them over hackeysacks. The puds are sewn over the whole length so reduced snag potential here. Puds seems preferrable to me as they present less snag hazard than hackeys (in the door, with other jumpers etc.) and I think they are aerodynamically safer, also for fast rotations etc. Have used puds for couple hundred of jumps now (including a lot of wingsuit) and never had a problem on pull time. Also, I would not see why a pud should be harder to pull than a PVC. I agree that a hackey is sometimes easier to grab, but again, if you are not sure then do a couple hundred of practice pull on the ground and you have a good chance of grabbing it right on pull time :). All the best, Eduard. -- Eduard Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The111 1 #9 August 15, 2005 QuoteMy Wings pc most definately has a 'gap' between the pud and the apex of the pc where it's attached. It has to or it wouldn't really work. I don't understand this statement. Why wouldn't it still work with two attachment points, without a gap?www.WingsuitPhotos.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gus 1 #10 August 16, 2005 QuoteI don't understand this statement. Why wouldn't it still work with two attachment points, without a gap? Without that gap you could have either (a) pc completely in boc but pud flapping in breeze or (b) pub securely tucked under flap of container but apex of pc peeking out the boc. That seems to be the case with my Wings anyway. What do you mean by two attachment points, one at either end of the pud rather than one central one? I don't think that would change anything. GusOutpatientsOnline.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
droquette 0 #11 August 16, 2005 so what is the attachment point like on an Icon? I am about to order a new rig which I plan to use for freefly and wingsuit. I want a Pud, but after reading this thread am confused. Any comments are appreciated. Thanks, DanHISPA 72 ----- "Muff Brother" 3733 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 74 #12 August 16, 2005 A buddy of mine has an Icon container and it has a 'normal' freefly pud With 'normal' I mean a completely attached pud, (bird-man-suitable would be the term you're looking for probably) Not attached at the bottom of your pilot by a cord like a pull-out pud like Gus' I've never seen one of those up-close...I think most new containers/pilots have a 'correct' freefly-pud (mine also does)JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gus 1 #13 August 16, 2005 Jarno you couldn't post a pic of yours could you? GusOutpatientsOnline.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mccordia 74 #14 August 16, 2005 QuoteJarno you couldn't post a pic of yours could you? Gus Dude...carefull what you ask over the internet.. My rig is away for a repack, but I'll take a snapshot of it as soon as I get it back (saterday)JC FlyLikeBrick I'm an Athlete? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skymedic 0 #15 August 16, 2005 My new wings pilot chute with free fly pud and all of my wings freefly puds are attached by a single peace of what looks like type 3 binding tape with about a half inch gap from the pud to the apex of the pilot chute. I did have a nasty pilot chute in knot incident not too long ago due to this....the bridle didn't knot up but the whole pilot chute did. Marc otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cpoxon 0 #16 August 16, 2005 QuoteI don't understand this statement. Why wouldn't it still work with two attachment points, without a gap? Because on the Wings handle the stiffener is wedged under the flap that closes around the bottom of the container. If the handle was sown all across the apex, there would be no flap to wedge, unless it was sown half way up and a crease put in it. I think this is where the confusion is arising; I have seen newer Javelin's with pud style handles that are sown to the top of the pilot chute but they are solely contained in the BOC and do not use the side flap to wedge it?Skydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tr027 0 #17 August 16, 2005 Only thing that's annoying me is people are referring to their handle as a PUD, when they really mean BOC method with a freefly handle. PUD is not the name of a handle, it's the name of a deployment method, just like you wouldn't say 'uh, yeah, im using the BOC handle on my rig now, it's alot better'. Handle has nothing to do with deployment method, theyre 2 separate animals, and PUD method is highly discouraged for WS. Sorry, had to get that out after seeing so many posts where this was done."The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it. " -John Galt from Atlas Shrugged, 1957 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cpoxon 0 #18 August 16, 2005 QuotePUD is not the name of a handle, it's the name of a deployment method Really? From the Skydiving Glossary QuotePud. Slang for the handle on a pull out pilot chute system. Skydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tr027 0 #19 August 17, 2005 Really? From the Skydiving Glossary QuotePud. Slang for the handle on a pull out pilot chute system. Aha, tricky, you almost got me there, had me going at first. No, because in this context (which the original post established is not relating to pull-out deployment method) the term doesn't apply. "The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it. " -John Galt from Atlas Shrugged, 1957 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cpoxon 0 #20 August 17, 2005 QuoteNo, because in this context (which the original post established is not relating to pull-out deployment method) the term doesn't apply. FFS, yes it does. You are right, the original post doesn't refer to the whole deployment method, but it does refer to the handle. With the Wings freefly handle, the design is based on the pull-out style (the low-profile handle is tucked/secured away, and the handle must be extracted before pilot chute can be) so when drawing the comparison it is appropriate to call it a pud to differentiate it from the standard hackey which is unsecured, and bulkier. What would you call it? Henri refers to it as a "freestyle handle". Does that mean one should call it something else if one is flat-flying in a Wings?Skydiving Fatalities - Cease not to learn 'til thou cease to live Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notsane 0 #21 August 17, 2005 Link to similar discussion ... http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1590213;#1590213 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tr027 0 #22 August 17, 2005 Quote With the Wings freefly handle, ... Henri refers to it as a "freestyle handle". Does that mean one should call it something else if one is flat-flying in a Wings? That was my point, if you say Freefly handle there is no confusion what it is and distinctly differentiates it from hackey, without adding confusion over deploy method. That's all I had to say about that and will now return to this thread's regularly scheduled programming topic."The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it. " -John Galt from Atlas Shrugged, 1957 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skymedic 0 #23 August 17, 2005 a pud is not a pullout...a pud is a handle that is attached to a pullout system. two different things. Marc otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
