Parachute recommendations

On Mar 17, 3:56 pm, Tuno wrote:
I also know of a least one very experienced jumper
who would never consider using a ram air emergency chute in a glider.

I am a very experienced jumper (known by Andy) and I would never
consider using anything BUT a ram air emergency chute in my glider.

With appropriate wing loading, of course!

2NO

But would you recommend a chute like the P-124 emergency ram air for a
pilot that was NOT a experienced jumper ?

Todd

On Mar 17, 2:56*pm, Tuno wrote:
I also know of a least one very experienced jumper
who would never consider using a ram air emergency chute in a glider.

I am a very experienced jumper (known by Andy) and I would never
consider using anything BUT a ram air emergency chute in my glider.

With appropriate wing loading, of course!

2NO

So do you drop your water ballast before of after exiting the sticken
glider :-)

Pete

But would you recommend a chute like the P-124 emergency ram air for a
pilot that was NOT a experienced jumper ?

In general, yes. (Btw the P-124 is what I have in my Rigging
Innovations Aviator.)

The P-124 is remarkably easy to operate. My opinion is that a person
who is capable enough to have a private pilot license is also capable
of safely using the P-124 with no prior jump experience. But you *do*
need to RTFM and know what you've got.

And of course it's always a fun and worthwhile experience to visit
your nearest USPA affiliated skydiving center and make a tandem jump.
Tell the instructor that you're interested in pulling the handle when
the time comes. He/she will let you fly the canopy.

2NO

On Mar 17, 4:46 pm, Tuno wrote:
....
And of course it's always a fun and worthwhile experience to visit
your nearest USPA affiliated skydiving center and make a tandem jump.
Tell the instructor that you're interested in pulling the handle when
the time comes. He/she will let you fly the canopy.

2NO

I am actually considering doing either a tandem or AFF jump for both
the fun and the practice.

Todd

toad wrote:

The manufacture of the linked parachute claims that the P-124 was
specifically designed as an emergency parachute for untrained airmen.
I'm also curious if anyone has used one.

I haven't, but I was chatting to my packer about a month or so back
because my canopy is old and getting towards its expiry date. The
packer, who assembled my chute, was explaining that its getting very
hard to find round canopies because nobody is making them now. He said
that we'll all be in square chutes before long because of the round
canopy supply issue and added that they cost significantly more.

He also pointed at the Aviator emergency chute and said the same as you
saw - that it can be used by an untrained jumper. According to him the
emergency model has lower maneuverability but is steerable and can't be
stalled, which can collapse the chute.


--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |

these are only for certified jumpers who have experience in this type of
parachute. However, it also should be noted that square parachutes do not
function like round or conical parachutes, they don't open reliably unless
you are in a stable position, something you likely will not be in
immediately after a bail out and may never be in if you're not an
experienced jumper, more likely you will exit and emergency bail out
tumbling and even with experience you may be disabled and unable to enter
into a proper PLF position for deployment.

That used to be true ... a looooong time ago ... but square (ram air)
parachutes became much more reliable that round ones within a few
years after they were invented. (Round parachutes inherently want to
be in a closed configuration. Ram-airs want to be open. Emergency ram-
air parachutes are far more reliable than round ones, in any
deployment position, which is why round ones are so rare among
skydivers today, as emergency parachutes.)

Modern emergency ram-airs like the P-124 are every bit as dependable
as the rounds, and they are (by design) docile, forgiving, pretty much
idiot proof, and you can pretty much land them where you want, clear
of power lines, houses, lakes, freeways, and Lennie.

2NO
4300 ram-air jumps, zero deployment malfunctions

"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
news:jQwDj.8843$2Y4.6839@trndny01...
...
The main advantage seems to be a lower descent rate of 12 feet/second, vs
the standard round emergency parachutes that have 18 feet/second. My high
school physics says it's about the difference between jumping off a 2.5
foot high ladder vs a 5 foot high ladder.


I _assume_ a better comparison would be jumping off a stationary 5 foot
ladder vs. jumping off a moving pickup truck?

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

On Mar 17, 9:17*am, Eric Greenwell wrote:
Jim Meade wrote:
I'm looking at a parachute for a glider. *Would like to use it for
other flying, as well, if it is suitable. *INo clue of the advantages/
disadvantages of any of them.

A friend of mine is also looking for a new parachute. He is considering
a new type of emergency parachute that is rectangular ram air design,
like a sport parachute, but does not require the training that a sport
parachute does. I believe this is the one:

http://www.parachuteshop.com/aviator..._parachute.htm

Scroll down about one page to the section labeled "The canopy".

The main advantage seems to be a lower descent rate of 12 feet/second,
vs the standard round emergency parachutes that have 18 feet/second. My
high school physics says it's about the difference between jumping off a
2.5 foot high ladder vs a 5 foot high ladder.

Any comments on the desirability of this new design compared to the
round parachutes we use now? Is the lower descent rate ever a liability;
e.g., in updrafts near a cloud? Does the lower descent rate also mean
you might dragged more after landing in windy conditions?

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes"http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* * * New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" atwww.motorglider.org

The P124 Aviator isn't a new design. It's been available for about 10
years. For whatever reason it hasn't seemed to catch on. Comfort might
be the reason. I tried one on and there was no way that you could lay
on it for any length of time. I suspect that this will be the case for
any ram air parachute packed in a bag type deployment system (all of
them). The deployment bag, and ram air canopy construction, simply
does not allow the rigger much latitude in how to distribute the
canopy material in the parachute container. The traditional round
parachute with a daiper type deployment system affords the rigger much
greater freedom in how to arrange the canopy in the container. The
result is a much more comfortable rig to lay on.
If the concern is lower descent rate, there is a round parachute that
you might consider - Free Flight Enterprises Preserve V canopy. It is
rated at (if I recall correctly) 254 lbs @ 180kts and has a descent
rate simillar to the P124 canopy. The Preserve V is certified FAA TSO
C23d and is available in the Paraphernalia Softie line of containers.
Allen Silver (Silver Parachute Sales) has jumped this canopy and can
testify to the low descent and quick opening.

On Mar 17, 4:59 pm, Tinwings wrote:
On Mar 17, 9:17 am, Eric Greenwell wrote:



Jim Meade wrote:
I'm looking at a parachute for a glider. Would like to use it for
other flying, as well, if it is suitable. INo clue of the advantages/
disadvantages of any of them.

A friend of mine is also looking for a new parachute. He is considering
a new type of emergency parachute that is rectangular ram air design,
like a sport parachute, but does not require the training that a sport
parachute does. I believe this is the one:

http://www.parachuteshop.com/aviator..._parachute.htm

Scroll down about one page to the section labeled "The canopy".

The main advantage seems to be a lower descent rate of 12 feet/second,
vs the standard round emergency parachutes that have 18 feet/second. My
high school physics says it's about the difference between jumping off a
2.5 foot high ladder vs a 5 foot high ladder.

Any comments on the desirability of this new design compared to the
round parachutes we use now? Is the lower descent rate ever a liability;
e.g., in updrafts near a cloud? Does the lower descent rate also mean
you might dragged more after landing in windy conditions?

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes"http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" atwww.motorglider.org

The P124 Aviator isn't a new design. It's been available for about 10
years. For whatever reason it hasn't seemed to catch on. Comfort might
be the reason. I tried one on and there was no way that you could lay
on it for any length of time. I suspect that this will be the case for
any ram air parachute packed in a bag type deployment system (all of
them). The deployment bag, and ram air canopy construction, simply
does not allow the rigger much latitude in how to distribute the
canopy material in the parachute container. The traditional round
parachute with a daiper type deployment system affords the rigger much
greater freedom in how to arrange the canopy in the container. The
result is a much more comfortable rig to lay on.
If the concern is lower descent rate, there is a round parachute that
you might consider - Free Flight Enterprises Preserve V canopy. It is
rated at (if I recall correctly) 254 lbs @ 180kts and has a descent
rate simillar to the P124 canopy. The Preserve V is certified FAA TSO
C23d and is available in the Paraphernalia Softie line of containers.
Allen Silver (Silver Parachute Sales) has jumped this canopy and can
testify to the low descent and quick opening.

BTW apparently the rigger may not always have the option of arranging
the canopy/diaper within the container for all (round) emergency
parachutes. Something Allen pointed out to me, some emergency
parachute packing instructions just don't allow any latitude, I'm not
sure if the pack ends up being comfortable on those parachutes or not,
sorry I forget the brands (except it is not paraphernalia), but I
believe is well the exception not rule.

Darryl

Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe wrote:
"Eric Greenwell" wrote in message
news:jQwDj.8843$2Y4.6839@trndny01...
...
The main advantage seems to be a lower descent rate of 12 feet/second,
vs the standard round emergency parachutes that have 18 feet/second.
My high school physics says it's about the difference between jumping
off a 2.5 foot high ladder vs a 5 foot high ladder.


I _assume_ a better comparison would be jumping off a stationary 5 foot
ladder vs. jumping off a moving pickup truck?

I'm not sure what you mean, but what I was trying to say is a 12
feet/second descent rate is how fast you are moving after jumping from a
2.5 foot high ladder, etc. Any horizontal motion would depend on the
wind strength and which direction you were pointed relative to it.

--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly

* Updated! "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* New Jan '08 - sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more

* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org