eames

Yes, every manufacturer is capable of making mistakes, including RWS. But maybe other manufacturers simply have different design considerations. Maybe some use a mesh that has a bias that is parallel to the stitching. Is that not possible? Maybe not, but I'm not going to jump to conclusions just because I can see one small piece of the puzzle. Jason

LOL

Yeah, that's why I said, "I don't know about you...." I wasn't suggesting that... I was just asking if Krishan had considered that the kill-line may have shrunk as well. Jason

You have the same main PC that you had in August of 2000? I don't know about you, but that's time enough for about 500 jumps for me. Have you considered that the kill-line may have shrunk? Considering that Jeff Johnston was the long-time product manager for RWS, I'd like to think that Mirage knows how to make a pilot chute. Jason

As I've said in some other thread... I use Super-bands and I've had great luck with them. They're small enough to hold HMA well and they last a lot longer than standard rubber bands. They're also much stronger than standard rubber bands, and many people are hesitant to use them because they think they won't break, but I've had them break on deployment on at least a few occasions. Even when they were brand new. I recommend them... Jason

It all boils down to money anyway. If large cross-braced canopies provided characteristics that more people wanted (demand), then the manufacturers would sell them (supply). We can speculate about why that isn't the case until we turn blue, but we're really arguing a moot point unless a manufacterer speaks up and explains it to us.... I've said my piece. Jason

I don't think they necessarily need to be loaded heavily to fly "well", as in, to fly like a Stiletto, but they do need to be loaded heavily to exhibit the flying characteristics they were designed to improve upon. Does it? All by itself? Or does the structure need to be stressed more than conventional designs to produce this rigidity and smooth, efficient airfoil? Why would the manufacturers themselves say that these designs need to be more heavily loaded if it wasn't true? They would surely be making more money if they were selling more of their more expensive products.... One of the drawbacks of a 98 sq. ft. cross-braced canopy is the pack volume, but people still buy them. I'm sure that this is partly true, because the increase in wing-loading will increase the horizontal and vertical speed of the wing, but a lot of it also has to do with the trim of the canopy, and I think they're trimmed more steeply make steep dives more easily achievable. cobaltdan, groundzero, anybody?? Jason

Poor openings? On that point I'll have to disagree.

I don't think you'd get better performance. I think the x-braced, tri-celled canopies need a higher wing-loading for their performance increases to be realized. This may be because they need the extra weight underneath them to help shape their airfoil. I think the higher wingloading also helps to maintain a higher airspeed to keep the internal air pressure higher. They're higher performance because they're more rigid, more efficient airfoils, but they need the additional weight to keep them that way-- to stress the internal structure and to keep the airspeed high. I could be way off though... maybe one of the canopy manufacturers lurking here could help? Jason

Who is they? Who are you referring to? I don't remember anybody saying that they won't use tube stoes because they don't break, then say they'll use super bandz instead. Furthermore, I just said that I've had many break on deployment. I was trying to convey that they're not "...really hard to break." Jason

Whew... easy on the shit-talking karma, man! You'd better go knock on some wood, or at the very least go appease the beer gods. It's one thing to say something like that while playing foosball, but damn. Jason

I'm a little behind on the knotting nomenclature, but I believe I use a single overhand knot on a looped end, with the excess fingertrapped. I also jump a Xaos with HMA, and I haven't had any problems with that knot loosening or migrating. Jason

I use Super-bands all around and I've had great luck with them. They're small enough to hold HMA well and they last a lot longer than standard rubber bands. They're much stronger than standard rubber bands, and many people are hesitant to use them because they think they won't break, but I've had them break on me on many occasions. Even when they were brand new. I recommend super bands... Jason

I'm very particular about packing and I followed the directions that came with the canopy to a tee. I now have very consistant openings on an elliptical canopy loaded at 2.4. If I'm botching my pack jobs, which I doubt, then my current canopy is much more forgiving of packing errors. Like I said, it was probably just that demo canopy. But if I was sent a demo with 2000 jumps that has been in the water 5 times and dried in the sun, well that's too bad for Atair, 'cause that's why I didn't buy a Cobalt. Jason

Thank you for trying to help, but I did read the instruction sheet before I jumped it. I never used the rear risers to steer during inflation. And not only did I not like the terminal, normal altitude openings, but the sub-terminal and high altitude openings were even worse. I've been jumping Xaos' ever since, and they open much more nicely than that Cobalt demo did. Subterminal, terminal, high altitude, low altitude, high speed, low speed, with rear risers and without. I'm not trying to bash your product-- it probably was that particular demo. I just didn't have very good luck with it. But I do know of a bunch of people that had the same problems on different demos. Jason

I did 40 jumps on a Cobalt 120 demo. I didn't like the openings. Snivel, snivel, SNAP. Sure it sniveled for a long time, like they said it would, but then it would finish up too hard. Maybe it was just that canopy, but why would they send out a demo that doesn't open well? I did like the way it flew, but I've since found canopies that I like a lot more. I haven't tried the h-mod or comp Cobalts. Jason

I have about 150 jumps on my Mirage with the freefly handle. (1)I don't think it is any more difficult to deploy. I don't have to twist it in any way. Just grab and throw, just like with a hackey. However, I do pack the PC so that there is a depression right next to the handle, so that I can get a better grip on it. (2)I would say it's a little more secure. More tolerant of loose spandex? Probably not. (3)Mine are still secure. There really isn't much to get worn out. It's just a stiffener that goes under the flap that was already there. (4)I think with the pressure off the main container, it would be just as likely to self-extract as a hackey. I think that has more to do with how you pack your PC. Jason

Both my Xaos' open great. I use AR superbands. Single stowed. They're slightly smaller than regular rubber bands, they keep their elasticity longer, and yes they do break. I had one break on deployment just this weekend. Jason

As I understand it, as forward speed increases, front riser pressure increases. The cleaner the airfoil, the higher the top forward speed, the more lift the canopy can create, the higher the front riser pressure can build to after a speed building maneuver. I'm sure it also has a lot to do with airfoil shape, line trim, etc.. I've never jumped a Diablo, but being that it's a conventional design, I doubt that it's capable of reaching the same top forward speed as the Xaos. I've never had any trouble staying on front risers on a Xaos. They have very light front riser pressure. I can still make minor adjustments even after a carving 360. But I'm usually off the front risers before I even finish a turn like a 360. I'll finish it with harness input and start transitioning to rear risers anyway.... Jason

Gotcha. Yep. Probably more of any issue with openings. You know, openings have been really easy to control on my UNISYNs. I don't really know what to attribute it to. Maybe to the canopy, Xaos' open really nicely. I wonder if the fully articulated harness really helps that much? I wonder how openings on Voodoo, Javelin Odyssey and other fully articulated harness systems compare with identical canopies? I was only paying attention to full flight characteristics when I jumped other non-articulated harnesses. Jason

Yeah, my Xaos 98 doesn't turn as fast as a lot of other canopies. Even at 2.4. But I don't want a fast turn rate-- I want the extremely large recovery arc for speed building. I like the smooth controlled turns with great amounts of altitude loss. Great for swooping. But trust me, you can make a Xaos fly/turn as fast as you want it to. Jason

I have 40 jumps on a demo Cobalt 120 and I didn't have the same luck with the openings. Crappy compared to a Spectre. It would snivel, snivel, snivel, SNAP!! Two other jumpers I know that tried two other different Cobalt demos, both told me that their demos also had the snivel, SNAP syndrome. I get much better openings on my Xaos. Always slow, always smooth, steerable. Jason

First off, I have two Xaos 98's loaded at ~2.4 and I have ~150 jumps on them. They have been equally (or more) stable than any canopy that I've ever jumped. Item #1. That jumper was flying his Xaos 68 over a spot that was known for bad rotors and he was flying in a relativetly low-speed flight mode. I went over to their dz after it happened, and from what I gathered, it could have happened to any canopy. Another jumper also told me about her Triathalon 135 collapsing in the same spot, in similar conditions. Was it the Xaos? I really don't think it was. Item #2: Crew with FXs, Velocitys, Xaos'? And you're complaining about stability in a stack? Imagine that Xaos in tight wrap with those HMA lines around your ankle. High performance canopies are not designed with crew in mind. Do you think the manufacturer was thinking, "hmm... when someone docks on our extremely high performance 80 sqft canopy, it loses pressure... what can we do about that"? No. Complaining that ANY of those canopies is unstable in crew is like complaining that a Corvette is not good for off-roading. I think you may be on to something with the front riser pressure vs. forward canopy stability. Maybe it does allow front end collapses more easily. Moral of the story: Don't jump any canopy in very turbulent conditions. They ARE fabric, and at some point, they will ALL fail. Also, you don't expect a crew canopy to swoop... so don't expect a swoop canopy to be good for crew. Jason

Try loosening your chest strap a little more. If you take the pressure off the chest strap you'll eliminate the equalization effect. I loosen my chest strap all the way and haven't noticed ANY difference between the G3 and other rigs. Like I said before, I've also done a direct comparison with other rigs, and they were no different. Jason

I have a G3 with the new stiffener plate. I think if anything, it makes it less difficult to peel the velcro away from the harness. Without the stiffener the velcro is flexible, and can stick to the harness even if you've distorted the handle i.e. twisted it. The stiffener actually gives you something to work with. I like it. I think it's better. Plus, it can't roll under your harness like other soft handles can, so it eliminates an even bigger concern. Jason