View Full Version : Round vs Square E-Chute
Jonathan St. Cloud
June 23rd 18, 12:32 AM
Three years ago when I got back into soaring I talked to serveral riggers about a round vs square chute. The riggers, including Allen Silver, all talked me out of a square for safety reasons. If you are seriously considering a square rig, I highly recommend you speak with a qualified rigger and discuss your needs and experience. For me, with a round chute, if you exit the aircraft and pull the rip cord, the chute will open and bring you to earth. With a square you have to fly and it can deploy in a stated where it is already in a death spiral. I figure if I am under silk I am done flying for the day.
Dan Marotta
June 23rd 18, 12:46 AM
Ever heard of a Mae West?Â* That's when you get a line over the top of a
round canopy.Â* There are many malfunctions you can have with either type
of canopy, most are recoverable.
You don't have to "fly" an emergency ram air chute.Â* The developer of
mine told me that, during testing, he landed under the canopy hands
off.Â* I would still have a grip on the steering/braking toggles.Â* Flying
the chute is trivial; easier than flying the glider, and you fly the
same traffic pattern with the same altitudes at your turn points.Â* It
only has a steeper glide angle than the glider and much better forward
speed than a round canopy.Â* It's far more controllable than a round
canopy, too.
I took the ground school at the local jump club and only intended to
make one jump (solo).Â* It was so much fun that I did seven jumps before
deciding that I'd spent enough money that could have been used for tows.
Like they used to say - Don't knock it if you haven't tried it.
On 6/22/2018 5:32 PM, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> Three years ago when I got back into soaring I talked to serveral riggers about a round vs square chute. The riggers, including Allen Silver, all talked me out of a square for safety reasons. If you are seriously considering a square rig, I highly recommend you speak with a qualified rigger and discuss your needs and experience. For me, with a round chute, if you exit the aircraft and pull the rip cord, the chute will open and bring you to earth. With a square you have to fly and it can deploy in a stated where it is already in a death spiral. I figure if I am under silk I am done flying for the day.
--
Dan, 5J
JS[_5_]
June 23rd 18, 01:29 AM
On Friday, June 22, 2018 at 4:46:21 PM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
> Ever heard of a Mae West?Â* That's when you get a line over the top of a
> round canopy.Â* There are many malfunctions you can have with either type
> of canopy, most are recoverable.
>
> You don't have to "fly" an emergency ram air chute.Â* The developer of
> mine told me that, during testing, he landed under the canopy hands
> off.Â* I would still have a grip on the steering/braking toggles.Â* Flying
> the chute is trivial; easier than flying the glider, and you fly the
> same traffic pattern with the same altitudes at your turn points.Â* It
> only has a steeper glide angle than the glider and much better forward
> speed than a round canopy.Â* It's far more controllable than a round
> canopy, too.
>
> I took the ground school at the local jump club and only intended to
> make one jump (solo).Â* It was so much fun that I did seven jumps before
> deciding that I'd spent enough money that could have been used for tows.
>
> Like they used to say - Don't knock it if you haven't tried it.
>
> On 6/22/2018 5:32 PM, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> > Three years ago when I got back into soaring I talked to serveral riggers about a round vs square chute. The riggers, including Allen Silver, all talked me out of a square for safety reasons. If you are seriously considering a square rig, I highly recommend you speak with a qualified rigger and discuss your needs and experience. For me, with a round chute, if you exit the aircraft and pull the rip cord, the chute will open and bring you to earth. With a square you have to fly and it can deploy in a stated where it is already in a death spiral. I figure if I am under silk I am done flying for the day.
>
> --
> Dan, 5J
Thanks for making this a separate thread.
After thinking it insane to be putting on a round chute on a wave day, I bought a square rig. Experience was 22 jumps, 2 of them solo square jumps, plus a couple of hundred paraglider landings. The early jumps were round parachutes: Tern, LL and 7TU. Looking back with square experience, they weren't very controllable.
The square makes a lot of sense. If you do not unlock the toggles, it does not accelerate to best L/D, in my case 3.5:1. Using the toggles it is extremely steerable and maneuverable. Stand up landings where you want to land are easy.
The photo of where YO landed is a great example of the places you could easily end up under a round canopy and can avoid with a square.
As Dan points out, there are various malfunction modes of parachutes.
On our first jump day, my friend had a line over / Mae West (looks like a bra instead of one large canopy) on a 28' Tern. Fortunately it was still large enough for her to do a PLF without hurting herself. Not the same with a big guy and a 22' or 24' round at any elevation.
Jim
On Friday, June 22, 2018 at 7:32:53 PM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> Three years ago when I got back into soaring I talked to serveral riggers about a round vs square chute. The riggers, including Allen Silver, all talked me out of a square for safety reasons. If you are seriously considering a square rig, I highly recommend you speak with a qualified rigger and discuss your needs and experience. For me, with a round chute, if you exit the aircraft and pull the rip cord, the chute will open and bring you to earth. With a square you have to fly and it can deploy in a stated where it is already in a death spiral. I figure if I am under silk I am done flying for the day.
The riggers that sell parachutes to pilots are either really old school or feel that their stock options would be too limited if they suggested squares. Or a combo of both. Look at it this way we've been chucking students out of airplanes with square mains and square reserves for over 30 years and it works. Millions of jumps, untold numbers of ugly deployments and overwhelmed students performing poorly. I'd guess most racing pilots post bail out could fly a square parachute as well as the average skydive student. If you want a second opinion go to a large dropzone on a rainy/windy day and ask the instructors round or square. The only reason to buy a round is price and that only matters used, if you are buying new the extra 500 bucks is a no brainer(That's coming from a cheap 1-26 driver.)
If I was in the business of selling glider pilots parachutes I'd hire a young tough dumb jumper to demo a typical round and then jump a square at the big races, guarantee everyone who saw the difference live would pull out a credit card.
To quote my rigger, when asked about a round vs. square:
"A Round will get you down. A Square will get you there."
His opinion is that a square, with better directional control and a lower descent rate is a viable and desirable solution for users (or unwilling victims) who have the basic skills to line up into the wind and execute even a minimal flare as the ground approaches. His advice indicates that proper training is definitely recommended, but since we are supposedly experienced aviators with a healthy desire to make it out alive, it is better to be a Pilot In Command of the emergency equipment. A steerable, lower descent rate square chute will beat any of the semi-steerable round chutes commonly used in the sailplane community. (Provided it is implemented correctly.) Of course, because of the higher forward speed of the square design, the implications of landing downwind are a significant concern. But then attempting to land a "steerable" round in high wind conditions also presents a significant danger of being slammed backwards and then dragged.
My 2000 Paraphernalia Softie is getting close to the manufacturer's 20 year life limit. I know all the pro vs. con arguments, but since it is my own little pink body that is at stake, I intend to replace the old round with a square and take some training.
I wonder what role terrain makes in the decision? A round seems like A better choice if trees are abundant, square if landing in a flat field.
DT
To be properly considered as a emergency chute suitable for the majority of glider pilots a square chute would have to be designed to be used by pilots without jumping experience. It is very unlikely that more than a few pilots will want to, or get around to, doing that.
On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 1:04:59 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> I wonder what role terrain makes in the decision? A round seems like A better choice if trees are abundant, square if landing in a flat field.
> DT
Nope.
On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 4:00:01 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> To be properly considered as a emergency chute suitable for the majority of glider pilots a square chute would have to be designed to be used by pilots without jumping experience. It is very unlikely that more than a few pilots will want to, or get around to, doing that.
The square reserves for pilots are designed to be used by people with no jumping experience. For all pilots care about the latest glider or flight computer it is amazing how content some are with 1600's parachute technology. Rounds are only better in price, and new not by much.
On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 1:34:16 PM UTC+1, wrote:
> On Saturday, June 23, 2018 at 4:00:01 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> > To be properly considered as a emergency chute suitable for the majority of glider pilots a square chute would have to be designed to be used by pilots without jumping experience. It is very unlikely that more than a few pilots will want to, or get around to, doing that.
>
> The square reserves for pilots are designed to be used by people with no jumping experience. For all pilots care about the latest glider or flight computer it is amazing how content some are with 1600's parachute technology. Rounds are only better in price, and new not by much.
Is a reserve chute the same as an emergency chute?
Dan Marotta
June 23rd 18, 03:50 PM
Yes, Mark, the experienced pilot should have no trouble at all flying a
rectangular parachute.
On my first and second jumps, the jump master on the ground rigged a
radio receiver to my chest strap, common for all new students.Â* I had
difficulty making out the commands and just did the maneuvers briefed
before the jumps.Â* My wife, at the drop zone, told me that the jump
master said something like, "He's not paying attention to the radio, but
he's doing the maneuvers, so we'll just eliminate the radio."Â* The
maneuvers he was talking about are simply, turn right, turn left, and flare.
Not intending to be a sport jumper, that's all I needed.Â* Simply pull
down on the right, or the left, or both toggles.Â* After an emergency
jump the pilot should look up to check the canopy (either round or
square), clear any malfunctions (about all you can do is kick your legs
and twist at the risers - experienced jumpers can probably add a lot to
this), or in the extreme, cut one or more lines if you have the proper
tool
<https://www.ebay.com/itm/US-Air-Force-Parachute-Suspension-Line-Cutter/163102014613?hash=item25f9a33c95:g:-eAAAOSw2q9a55h8>.Â*
I note with sadness that this tool only has the hook blade.Â* Back in the
day we had both the manual hook blade and a switch blade knife, as well.
The real benefit, in my opinion, is the higher forward speed, IIRC
around 11 kts vs 3 or less for the round canopy, with a 4-line cut or
mesh panel at the back, and the quick steering which gives the user the
ability to fly to a "better" landing area and turn into the wind, or
across the wind, whichever seems better at the time.
On 6/22/2018 9:53 PM, wrote:
> To quote my rigger, when asked about a round vs. square:
>
> "A Round will get you down. A Square will get you there."
>
> His opinion is that a square, with better directional control and a lower descent rate is a viable and desirable solution for users (or unwilling victims) who have the basic skills to line up into the wind and execute even a minimal flare as the ground approaches. His advice indicates that proper training is definitely recommended, but since we are supposedly experienced aviators with a healthy desire to make it out alive, it is better to be a Pilot In Command of the emergency equipment. A steerable, lower descent rate square chute will beat any of the semi-steerable round chutes commonly used in the sailplane community. (Provided it is implemented correctly.) Of course, because of the higher forward speed of the square design, the implications of landing downwind are a significant concern. But then attempting to land a "steerable" round in high wind conditions also presents a significant danger of being slammed backwards and then dragged.
>
> My 2000 Paraphernalia Softie is getting close to the manufacturer's 20 year life limit. I know all the pro vs. con arguments, but since it is my own little pink body that is at stake, I intend to replace the old round with a square and take some training.
>
--
Dan, 5J
I was looking at a friend's round emergency chute over the weekend which was open for inspection - no toggles. It also had no quick release clips to release the chute from the harness - so being dragged by the wind is a likely event. The cute had the most basic modification - just a mesh area at the back of the chute to impart some sort of forward motion. The consensus by the skydivers who were watching the packer inspect it is it will get a pilot down alive. The packer called it a "controlled bounce".
Does an emergency square have toggles?
Clinton
On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 5:59:34 AM UTC-4, wrote:
> I was looking at a friend's round emergency chute over the weekend which was open for inspection - no toggles. It also had no quick release clips to release the chute from the harness - so being dragged by the wind is a likely event. The cute had the most basic modification - just a mesh area at the back of the chute to impart some sort of forward motion. The consensus by the skydivers who were watching the packer inspect it is it will get a pilot down alive. The packer called it a "controlled bounce".
>
> Does an emergency square have toggles?
>
Yes. And on a square they actually do something. Toggles on a round just change the direction you face while drifting downwind.
> Clinton
Dan Marotta
June 25th 18, 05:10 PM
Mine has toggles.
On 6/25/2018 3:59 AM, wrote:
> I was looking at a friend's round emergency chute over the weekend which was open for inspection - no toggles. It also had no quick release clips to release the chute from the harness - so being dragged by the wind is a likely event. The cute had the most basic modification - just a mesh area at the back of the chute to impart some sort of forward motion. The consensus by the skydivers who were watching the packer inspect it is it will get a pilot down alive. The packer called it a "controlled bounce".
>
> Does an emergency square have toggles?
>
> Clinton
--
Dan, 5J
Dan Marotta
June 25th 18, 05:16 PM
I forgot to mention - my wife had our master rigger add toggles to her
National 360.Â* By looking at the manual I think they're optional.
On 6/25/2018 3:59 AM, wrote:
> I was looking at a friend's round emergency chute over the weekend which was open for inspection - no toggles. It also had no quick release clips to release the chute from the harness - so being dragged by the wind is a likely event. The cute had the most basic modification - just a mesh area at the back of the chute to impart some sort of forward motion. The consensus by the skydivers who were watching the packer inspect it is it will get a pilot down alive. The packer called it a "controlled bounce".
>
> Does an emergency square have toggles?
>
> Clinton
--
Dan, 5J
Jonathan St. Cloud
July 2nd 18, 04:08 PM
On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 9:16:18 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
> I forgot to mention - my wife had our master rigger add toggles to her
> National 360.Â* By looking at the manual I think they're optional.
>
> On 6/25/2018 3:59 AM, wrote:
> > I was looking at a friend's round emergency chute over the weekend which was open for inspection - no toggles. It also had no quick release clips to release the chute from the harness - so being dragged by the wind is a likely event. The cute had the most basic modification - just a mesh area at the back of the chute to impart some sort of forward motion. The consensus by the skydivers who were watching the packer inspect it is it will get a pilot down alive. The packer called it a "controlled bounce".
> >
> > Does an emergency square have toggles?
> >
> > Clinton
>
> --
> Dan, 5J
Anyone know if the sport aerobatic pilots use square or round? Way back in the 1990's all the sport aerobatic guys and us war bird guys all flew with round chutes, never even heard a debate on the subject.
Dave mentioned that he deployed his cute while he was face up. Are rounds more forgiving to the position from which they are deployed?
On Monday, July 2, 2018 at 11:08:37 AM UTC-4, Jonathan St. Cloud wrote:
> On Monday, June 25, 2018 at 9:16:18 AM UTC-7, Dan Marotta wrote:
> > I forgot to mention - my wife had our master rigger add toggles to her
> > National 360.Â* By looking at the manual I think they're optional.
> >
> > On 6/25/2018 3:59 AM, wrote:
> > > I was looking at a friend's round emergency chute over the weekend which was open for inspection - no toggles. It also had no quick release clips to release the chute from the harness - so being dragged by the wind is a likely event. The cute had the most basic modification - just a mesh area at the back of the chute to impart some sort of forward motion. The consensus by the skydivers who were watching the packer inspect it is it will get a pilot down alive. The packer called it a "controlled bounce".
> > >
> > > Does an emergency square have toggles?
> > >
> > > Clinton
> >
> > --
> > Dan, 5J
>
> Anyone know if the sport aerobatic pilots use square or round? Way back in the 1990's all the sport aerobatic guys and us war bird guys all flew with round chutes, never even heard a debate on the subject.
> Dave mentioned that he deployed his cute while he was face up. Are rounds more forgiving to the position from which they are deployed?
The top acro guys use squares, hobby acro pilots use what's laying around or what they've been sold, same as most glider pilots. Freefall students have been deploying square parachutes in all sorts of body positions for over 30 years, plus over thirty years of unstable square reserve deployments by experienced skydivers. Hundreds of thousands of unstable deployments. If they were worse we'd know. The only reason to sit on a round is because you already have one or you are buying one(cheap) second hand. Squares do everything better.
Andy Blackburn[_3_]
July 2nd 18, 06:01 PM
What are the differences in opening speed/altitude by parachute size or shape? The prevalent view on skydiving forums seems to be that smaller and round is the fastest, but, like r.a.s., it's kind of hard to sort who really knows what they are talking about (yes, I'm aware of the irony of asking this question here).
Andy Blackburn
9B
Jonathan St. Cloud
July 2nd 18, 06:53 PM
On Monday, July 2, 2018 at 10:01:45 AM UTC-7, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> What are the differences in opening speed/altitude by parachute size or shape? The prevalent view on skydiving forums seems to be that smaller and round is the fastest, but, like r.a.s., it's kind of hard to sort who really knows what they are talking about (yes, I'm aware of the irony of asking this question here).
>
> Andy Blackburn
> 9B
RAS also has highly experienced and knowledgeable people who are willing to put up with the BS and help the group as a whole. Andy Blackburn regularly posts here, he is a trained communicator, world class pilot, manager and all around good guy. John Cochrane world class pilot, theoretical mathematician who uses his skills for good. John Fitch, other than his unusual reliance on his iPhone for a glide computer :), everything he says one can be sure is well researched, and on point. Darryl Ramm, how many hours has he given this group to help educate all on, FAA alphabet soup. Craig Funston, only posts when he has something to share with the group others had not brought up. We are blessed to have some every knowledge pilots from Europe, Chile, OZ, Australia. Sure there are some packing peanuts around the prize but as in ebay, who you are buying from. And thanks RAS for the all the folks who contribute.
On Monday, July 2, 2018 at 1:01:45 PM UTC-4, Andy Blackburn wrote:
> What are the differences in opening speed/altitude by parachute size or shape? The prevalent view on skydiving forums seems to be that smaller and round is the fastest, but, like r.a.s., it's kind of hard to sort who really knows what they are talking about (yes, I'm aware of the irony of asking this question here).
>
> Andy Blackburn
> 9B
Opening time/distance is a wash. You want to be open higher? Train to get out of your glider and train to find and pull the ripcord. Add a static line.
I was told by a master jumper and ex sailplane pilot that there is no difference in speed of deployment. But he was selling/ giving me his chute getting out of sailplanes his quote "this is the largest square reserve that they make because I do not want to break my ankles when I land" A bunch of us also went and did a static line from 5K so I would know what to expect. The day long class and 1 jump was a 100 bucks or so. But it showed me that it was not that hard to steer and judge where I would glide too. I ended up about 10 feet from the center of the target and just fell onto one knee. (I was about 2 seconds behind the full flare or I would have stayed upright :) If your going to use a square I would suggest doing the class It was fun and very educational.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.