Check this out !
Super low pointless Base from 18,5 m and impact to the water...CIGANY style...
:D :D :D
http://www.blincmagazine.com/cgi-bin...1.jpg&img=&tt=
http://www.blincmagazine.com/cgi-bin...2.jpg&img=&tt=
http://www.blincmagazine.com/cgi-bin...1.jpg&img=&tt=
Cool! Is it just me, or does it look like a parachute which could be made to inflate chordwise as quickly as it does spanwise might be jumpable from 20m or so over hard ground?
Nice job Jason. I'll go second (so I can video, of course).
Good luck.;-)
I would not try it over hard ground....
Check the no3 picture...
:D :D :D
Am I right in assuming this was a non-vented canopy? Can you comment on the descent rate at impact? To what extent did having a bunch of nylon over your head slow you down?
Anyone have any ideas as to why the canopy inflates so quickly spanwise, but not so quickly chordwise?
Thanks!
Michael
P.S. Also, can you tell us what brake settings were used, were they tweaked for the jumper/canopy in question, etc.?
>Anyone have any ideas as to why the canopy
>inflates so quickly spanwise, but not so quickly
>chordwise?
My two cents from the three pictures posted... The jumper may have launched forward pretty substantially (see the first picture), which would have put the canopy into a stall on opening (picture 2) from which it recovered by diving near water level (picture 3).
Guys,
Some of us down here in Oz have jumped from the girders of a rail bridge in Melbourne at what looks like a lower height than in the pics. If the measurement of 18.5 metres is correct on these pics, then the height we jumped is definitely lower.
Various canopies were used (none of them vented), with varying results. I was the first (that I know of) to jump it, with a Raven 1 (181sq. ft.). Mostly I had full spanwise inflation, with the full chord of the canopy presented, yet no real pressurisation (top skin sitting on bottom skin). The bigger canopies (regardless of jumper weight) always had the worst results (one jumper actually hit the water in a perfect arch!! OUCH!!).
The reason I did this site in the first place was purely to see how much of an opening I could get from such a low height. Before doing the jump, I measured the distance at full stretch from top of static line (shorter than a full bridle) to bottom of leg straps - distance = 10 metres.
I mucked around a little with the packing, and found the best results came from actually wrapping the centre cell around the finished and stacked pack job. On a few of these jumps I had time (just) to induce a turn as it was opening.
Not very scientific I know, and as soon as I can scan the pics I will. The jumps were fun on rainy and windy afternoons. I choose not to leave my name as I only jump for my own enjoyment and could not care less to be known or credited with anything.
Flame away!:P
>The bigger canopies
>(regardless of jumper weight) always had the
>worst results (one jumper actually hit the water
>in a perfect arch!! OUCH!!).
Did you find that this trend continued? In other words, did the smallest canopies have the best results, or did things begin to taper off until everything leveled out? Above what sizes were the canopies seeing the slower openings?
--Tom Aiello
tbaiello@mac.com
>Did you find that this trend continued?
Yes! The more material that needed to inflate, the lesser the completion of opening. This was consistent. My Raven 1 (181sq. ft.) consistently had the best openings. The next best openings were with a Fury 220. These two canopies were in the same condition as each other. The Fury 220 consistently presented the top skin still buffeting (unfurling) for the rear 50% chordwise. Two of the other canopies respectively were a 228sq. ft. and a 265sq. ft. These canopies were in not quite as good a condition as the smaller two, so I would assume this would have an effect on the openings. The 265 was the one under which somebody impacted the water in a perfect arch... however I must say that the pack job on this canopy was a complete trash pack, with just the nose spread, with centre cell wrapped around the stack.
We did not choose to use brand new BASE specific canopies, as we did not consider these jumps being serious enough to warrant shortening the lives of good canopies. Considering I could (and have) jump off the bridge without a parachute, we did not consider the jump serious enough to shorten our lives!!!
I am quite confident, considering the results we obtained with these canopies, that a brand new vented BASE canopy would do extremely well (comparatively) at this height.
On that last note, if any organisations want that sort of testing done, and are prepared to supply the brand new vented BASE canopies required, I would be happy to help!!!!! (Yeah, like that'll happen)
Cheers!
:P :P
Cruiselite 220, no vent, no deep brakes...
The impact was pretty hard...:D :D :D
we spoke to him after the jump and asked him about rate of descent on impact, brake settings, pack-type etc, but everytime he opened his mouth to tell us, he just spurted out water. Sorry, we tried.
Hey Csaber!
Nice to see your pics! Thanks for sharing. So how's things in Hungary? c'ya!
Peace,
Karen T.
So, by this logic if a REALLY small canopy was used, like a 120 or smaller, we could make this work.
I don't know how much faster/slower a skydiving canopy would pressurize. Since there's no time for turns or corrections anyway, would a super-light ZP skydiving canopy be a good option for this jump? Is there a NEED for a BASE specific canopy in this situation is what I'm asking.
Let me know if my logic is skewed.
Stay Safe out there!!! ---Dex
Hi,
Things are goin well, as you see.
Nice antennas, chimneys here...
Will u try them ?
Wrote u a mail about the Bomba rig, please reply it.
Cya:
Csaber
:D
Hell, 2 sq ft canopy would open immediately, but it's not going to slow you down. From that description and looking at the pics from the first posts, it seems like the canopy is opening, but not much else, as the bridge in the pics and what you described are both low enough to do without a canopy.
In other words, it's awesome that people are getting their canopies open so fast, but whoever wanted to know if it could be done safely over hard ground... it's very doubtful.
- Mac
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks