Quagmirian

I logged out and then in again. This is my real profile.

Don't make the mistake two of my friends have, and buy a rig that is too small for you to jump right now. Buy something that you can jump now, and think about downsizing later.

Well more good news I suppose. I'm trying to get my yellow ZP canopy cleared soon and I'm not optimistic as we've rushed it a bit, but I'll keep my hopes up. I finally got round to jumping with a friend's GPS. He uses it for swooping, but the data it dumps out is amazing. I think I'll get one as soon as possible. You can sync it with video and the software is free too, so I can share the small files here for everyone to look at. [inline flysight.jpg]

I bought a why dangle action camera, and it's pretty crap, but it does at least allow me to see what the canopy is doing. [inline Untitled-1.png]

I'm happy to say I've done 6 legal jumps on my grey canopy since it was cleared. Credit to Dave Ruston for these great pictures. [inline 13517375_10153488106060927_3081542385919838731_o.jpg] [inline 13497521_10153488105910927_4439482648711866526_o.jpg]

Ah, I happen to have a good theory for PD's odd sizing of their 7 cells and reserves. The chord length, and therefore rib pattern, of the 143 for example is exactly the same as on a 170 PD 9 Cell. This means fewer patterns floating round the factory. Of course, now they use laser cutters but the old sizing method has remained. That's my guess anyway.

Yeah, that's the only reason I do it. Not so much about preventing lineovers as keeping the brake lines towards the centre.

Ok, I'm tentatively optimistic. My grey canopy has been looked at and cleared for use. I've come up with a hypothesis for why my canopies feel 'weird'. The rib design features more curvature towards the front. Even the max thickness is in a usual place, I think this is forcing the Cp more forward than usual, so the nose of the canopy is trying to tilt up and back. It would explain the flatter than expected glide, and to a point the 'odd' turns. Looking back at pictures, I think it might help to extend the inboard steering line a bit.

For a girl of her size a 170 would mean wingloading of 0.76 or so, that is less than most people have on student canopy... Depending on her comfort level I would suggest either 150 or 135 9-cell canopy (with respective WL of 0.87 or 0.96 which both are on the extreme low end of recommended WL)....BOLLOCKS BOLLOCKS BOLLOCKS OP DON'T LISTEN TO THIS

I fail to see how end cell closure is a problem.

Ah technically it was the riggers committee who came up with that definition. Although I invite you to contact the BPA and tell them directly what you think. They're always asking for input.

Yeah, that's basically what I did. Full toggles and then let up one side. What's weird is that I'm sure I did it before and it didn't start to spin. Along with toggle sashaying it's a thing I need to dedicate more jumps to. On that note, the nose tends to creep down and then bounce back up a bit when toggle sashaying. I actually managed to get half a line twist doing that. But all the jumps have been with the slider down, so I still need to test worst case scenario. The openings have actually been pretty good since I changed the brake lines from 1,2,4,6 to 1,2,3,5. 1000 feet from throwing the pilot chute to releasing brakes. And they seem to be quite consistent, so if you open right after a track, you get a nice gentle kick from the snivel and you end up open at the same height. I'm going to see if I can get at least one of these canopies cleared by a BPA rigger. Wish me luck.

Ok here's the video which I can't be arsed to edit down https://youtu.be/-B4a4tb6evI And here's some pictures taken by Ross Vick: [inline 1.png] [inline 2.png] [inline 3.png] [inline 4.png] Well it works I suppose.

Uh... sort of... I put two extra slinks on each rear riser, single wrapped. So it added about 4 inches to the rears. I'm not doing that again. It was fine for two jumps, but just seem to be screaming out if the sky on the third. Also it fucked up the openings. When I get home I'll give it a good inspection before retrimming it. I've only managed 10 jumps on it and I feel bad because it seems to have a lot of potential. Onto other things, I did my 201st jump today, so you know what that means... [inline dive.jpg] The internet is a bit dodgy here so I'll upload the full video soon. There are some interesting things in it.

Ok, four inches on the rears is too much for the orange thing. 1500 feet/min at 0.9 is fucking scary. Let's reduce that a little bit... There's just something that doesn't feel right about this canopy. The turns are great but the stalls are quite sharp. Brakes don't slow it down too much and the flare leaves much to be desired. Glad I made it a 210 to be honest.

You did well. Good on you.

Ok, 3 weeks and 50 jumps in... The grey thing is still working fine. It's actually really nice once you get used to it. At terminal it has 700 ft openings which are mostly on heading. The weird turns aren't actually that weird. It brakes a bit when you toggle turn, but all rectangular canopies do that. I've given up on the orange thing for now. I really need a day in the rigging room to change all the lines. I think it'll be quite a fun canopy when I get it right. The turns actually seemed quite smooth. I've changed the brake line config from 1,2,4,6 to 1,2,3,5 on the ZP monster. It seems to help the openings and high toggle pressure a bit, but I'm still concerned about over extending the control range and reducing flare authority. I haven't gone properly terminal yet. So far it seems to be easy to land so long as there's a bit of wind. All in all it continues to be a fantastic learning experience. And I managed to buy some type 1a tape from Apex Base. Picture of my excellent landing: [inline grey2.png]

I'm sure I sent you a message saying I'd love some. Anyway, yes please, it would be really useful. I did some more subterminal jumps on the ZP monster, without the brakes set. It seemed to slow them down a lot to be honest, like the canopy was fighting the slider and cell inflation was taking over. I've done some 5 second delays with the brakes set halfway, using a method Marty Jones showed me. The openings are really nice so far.

Ok, so far I've done 16 jumps on the grey canopy, 5 on the orange and two on the ZP monster. The grey canopy is great. It opens quite positively and likes to turn on opening, but rolling the nose seems to control the heading and soften the openings a touch. I've taken it on 4 ways, tracking dives and a balloon. I love it. The orange canopy is a bit of a mystery. It opens like I would expect a reserve to. It seems really flat as well. It just sits in the sky and has no control range. This is puzzling because it should be trimmed like a PD 7 Cell. I think it might have something to do with cascade height, so I need to measure the trims and maybe modify it. The yellow ZP monster is a piece of shite. Excellent flight characteristics with a nice long control range, and more stability than I expected, but fuck the openings. They're uncomfortable even at 5 seconds. I think it's the brake settings, since the canopy is till inflating after the slider comes down. I would love to get some video at some point. I'm in SoCal for another 2 weeks, so if anybody wants to say hi, get in touch. Finally, what the BPA have to say on all this is available publicly here: http://www.bpa.org.uk/assets/Minutes/Riggers-2016-02-04-pdf.pdf

That's different though. An AAD is a sensitive electrical device and giving them a life makes sense. Parachutes on the other hand are quite tough and so long as they are stored and maintained well, they will last essentially indefinitely. I don't think this is even a question of obsolete gear either. Ravens are fine and we use them as reserves all the time over here. It just seems unnecessary to chuck kit that's perfectly serviceable and might be keeping someone in the sport.

This will probably be my last update before I go to sunny California and hopefully post lots of photos of my new canopies. I'll be in the Perris/Elsinore area from April 7th to May 5th, if anybody wants to say hi or have a 'product demo'. I've been sent a preliminary version of the minutes from the February rigger's meeting and they do indeed require manufacturers to have liability insurance. So I'd better not catch anyone jumping a Vector at a BPA DZ. The minutes should be available publicly soon from here: http://www.bpa.org.uk/member/agendas-and-minutes/

Reserve pilot chute not snug and centred?

I think there's a difference between imposing wing loading limits to hide bad performance and the manufacturer having integrity. Sure, they say, this reserve lands fine at 2.0, but we don't think any reserve should be loaded that high.

NCA I believe stands for Non-cascaded A line. I think those are the centre lines on a Falcon.

It's true that to become a BPA advanced rigger, you have to build a container from scratch, including all components. You can take one apart and copy it, or build one at a factory. After that, it's a bit hazy whether you're allowed to design new containers or just keep copying and modifying existing ones. None of this helps of course, since I am designing canopies. It would hurt everyone if the BPA were to say that to design canopies you had to be an advanced rigger or foreign equivalent. On the subject of non-BPA dropzones, if one sprang up I would visit straight away. It's one of the reasons I'm going abroad. When summer comes around I may go for a short trip to Ireland.