Yo Dwain -- gear suggestion

**460** · August 24th, 2000, 09:01 AM

I totally agree it's about time we, the active jumpers,
start making suggestions publicly and privately to
the gear manufacturers for either tailor-made or
general experimentational directions or overall directions
the gear should head to. You know, riggers and manufacturers
frequently cannot see the forest for the trees. They are
so inundated with details they cannot easily assess the
gear they are manufacturing. on top of that, they are
excessively conservative.

For example:

1) bottom skin holes with mesh. been done years ago...
I wasn't satisfied with my BASE canopy years ago and was
going to do this myself several years ago.

2) multiple bridle attachment points. been done... check out
the modern ram air called a Unit. but yes, it only has
attachment points on the center 3 and 5 cells. i saw that
canopy work better than most base canopies by BASE 74 and
others. BTW, BASE 74 made 900 base jumps by 1996.

SO! I want to hear gear suggestions from people. I
tried to get people to start thinking hard about this
back in 1996 when I posted a bunch of articles to a
BASE mailing list.

Here are some of my suggestions:

1) More elastic lines. Less stress will be placed on the
canopy during opening. Far less sensitivity to shoulder and
body (and harness tension) asymmetry. It is known that
spectra lines (nonelastic) will cause excessively hard
openings and shoulder assymetry will be accentuated (resulting
in frequent line twists)

2) Spandex pouches that have a complete release. Possibly
a handle on the other side.

3) pilot chutes with a 1/4" foam rubber stiffener on the crown.
been done. works very well.

4) toggles that will not friction lock when not using the
line mod. can simulate on the ground using either Adam's
or BR's toggles.

5) slider size experimentation. my BASE canopy opening
performance sucked. turned out they used to small of a
slider on it.

6) ZP rounds. open fast and they can land softer than
you think and are appropriate to some objects.

7) rounds with the apex pulled down. very, very fast
opening. can easily release center line after opening to
make landing.

8) front toggles on a convention base canopy. can a canopy
turn not as a flying wing but as an angled lower surface?

9) single surface square canopy.

10) triangular single surface canopies. seen it freefallen
over water from 90'. used on personel for high speed
race boating. when they fall out, their parachute inflates,
they stop, and hit the water.

11) vents on ZP pilot chutes. these pilot chutes oscillate
violently in the burble and can cause bad off heading
openings. even further, if you stow you pilot chute
particular ways, when you extract it, it will inflate
to the right of you and drag you pilot chute out an
angle, causing an off heading opening. this happened
to me on 100+ jumps. like rounds, vents would relieve
some of the spilling air and keep the pilot chute from
moving around violently. pc crown is not an easy
option. maybe some vents a 4 to 8 inches from the
center line with tape and mesh.

just a thought while i'm recovering from a nonBASE
related broken leg... Chris Stokely

guest · August 24th, 2000, 10:59 AM

Chris,
Check out our web page. Since around March 2000 we have had a section called "Requests". It's a form dedicated to product requests, concepts, thoughts, comments and ideas.

Only a handful of people have utilized it but it's a perfect vehicle to get your desires known.

We always have new projects in development.
But do realize that BASE is a small (as in microscopic) industry. Change is limited by a number of factors not the least of which is resources.

I Look forward to hearing your thoughts.

Adam Filippino

[link:www.crmojo.com|CR Home Page]

guest · August 24th, 2000, 02:39 PM

bridles with a steel ring up near the pilot chute larks head for static line jumps....any pros or cons?

guest · August 24th, 2000, 03:04 PM

Hello Chris,

Just a few words on the "Gear Industry."

So far all the major people who build BASE gear are experienced active BASE jumpers, and most have been around since before there was a "Gear Industry." That "conservatism" you speak of therefore stems from all the deaths and injuries they've witnessed since the late 70s or early 80s.

And that is a good thing.

Someday, when the market grows large enough, we may see BASE gear coming from outside the BASE community. And we, or worse, some unsuspecting newer BASE jumper will be the test dummy for what ever they may dream up.

You made suggestions that made sense and maybe some of those will come in time. However, I don't know many who'd want to go back to jumping Units. And the age old problem of toggles that are fool proof when used with the line over mod is just that, and age old problem. Every idea to date is a compromise of one sort or another.

As for mesh vents, sure, we all had that idea back in early eighties, but it's the current manufactures who are putting their money and reputations where our big mouths used to be.

In total, if you begin back when Rich, J.D. and others were hand stitching BASE rigs together to the work being done today by Todd & Anne, Adam, and Marta well, you just gotta go say wow!

A few more points:

- Rounds with a pulled down apex, while they do fly better, are more prone to line overs. The answer here may be some method of pulling the apex down after secondary opening shock is completed. (All in all, however, it sounds like more bother than it's worth).

- On lines. "ELASTICITY!" Is what Moe Viletto would always scream and he'd build it into his systems from top to bottom as much as possible. However, again we run into compromise. You want a canopy that performs better so BASE canopies are now being built using higher aspect ratios than before. (This means line trim is more important than ever). And they use DACRON lines because they "do" stretch, unlike SPECTRA. Right now anything with more give than Dacron (especially when used slider removed) will give you an out of trim canopy in an unacceptably small amount of jumps. Another problem is too much elasticity may add a third or even fourth opening and add to the line over problem. (A problem that seems to have finally been brought down to a manageable level).

- On front riser toggles. I suppose you mean actual toggles and control lines connected to the outboard leading edges. Interesting, but this would probably work better on smaller and faster canopies used for skydiving. Also, after any brainstorm like that always ask yourself (like I've seen Todd do a million times) is this just too complicated to be worthwhile?

- ZP pilot chutes that whirl in the burble? Well, burble shmurbel. It has nothing whatever to do with the burble. When you build a pilot chute with a top surface of zero porosity what you have re-invented is the old unmodified oscillating round parachute of the 1920s and 30s.

When ZP pilot chutes trap air that air wants to escape and there is nowhere for it to go, so the pilot chute tilts as the trapped air spills out from under the "skirt," (if you will). This tilt is what causes a ZP pilot chute to whirl around in circles above the deploying jumper. (We all saw this as soon as ZP pilots chutes made their first appearance at Bridge Day many years ago).

In the case of the old rounds they solved the oscillation problem by adding an "open vent" (a round hole) at the apex of the canopy. (And since spilling air didn't work as well anymore as a means to steer, whole panels were removed from the rear of the canopy and toggles were first used and these canopies were now said to be "modified.")

But for now, you can't use a open apex on a pilot chute as this is a high stress area and it would also be a heck of a snag point, instead I believe the basic shape of the pilot chute will change from something round to something with lobes. These lobes will create "air channels" and add overall stability. The answer for me personally was to use only F-111 pilot chutes and if a BASE jump came down to needing a ZP pilot chute to be successful, I passed.

The solution to this problem is coming. But it will take time. We are monkeying with the most important part of the entire system, ie, no pilot chute - no canopy. And even in it's present state, be it ZP or F-111, they don't always work 100 percent. (Talk to Will Oxx).

Adam's "suggestion page" is a good one. Todd also will sit down with anyone with an idea, but more often than not, I've seen him whip out the sketch pad and show them five ways it won't work!

You know, it took the skydiving gear industry almost 50 years to go from gutter gear to what we have today. One the other hand the BASE gear industry has only exsisted for about 15 years. Looked at that way, they aren't doing all that bad . . .

Hope the leg heals, Chris!!!!
Hi Dwain!

Nick :-)
BASE 194

**460** · August 26th, 2000, 07:51 AM

Hey Nick,
I agree with a lot of what you said. The gear has come
a long way. My only container until recently was one
of JD's rigs built circa 1985. And I still have one
of his pilot chutes.

The details of your comments can be addressed. There is
just too much to describe in a brief posting. For example,
it has always be known that rounds oscillate because of
the air spilling from the sides. The apex vent solved but
that is not a solution for a pilot chute because of the
reinforced crown area. I was suggesting a few small vent
holes covered with mesh elsewhere on the solid fabric of
the pilot chute.

Also, after talking with BASE 38 last night, he told
me that he, his brother, and BASE 1 had planned on doing the
inside of a building years ago using a small ZP round
with apex pulled down, with vent holes on all sides
to keep the canopy flying straight down. It also
happens that these pulled down apex canopies give
much more responsive turns and better landings (according
to the people who have jumped them). Yes, the line
over possibility would have to be addressed. And yes,
Adam is right -- the small market size doesn't lend
itself to the necessary expensive R & D. But the
area intrigues me so I'm always trying to think of
better ideas in general. Fortunately, legal BASE
sites are available where test drops can be done.

I've found a lot of the old timers to be invaluable
regarding what's been done and what's not been done.

My comments about the Unit -- no way we're going back
to it. But it had multiple attachment points and
the jumpers I saw use it had great if not better openings
than a lot of the BASE canopies I've seen. The best
one of all I've seen was BASE 175's Stratocloud which
had 2 attachments points and bottom skin inlet vents.
It never had an off heading in the 100 jumps it was
used.

anyway, there's too much to address here in this forum...

soft landings,
Chris