Basejumper.com - archive

Hey,

has there been any experimenting with continous and field-movable brake settings? Instead of having fixed brake settings sewn on, you would have a brake line consisting of two parts.

The upper part runs from the canopy down to a little fabric loop with a grommet in it. The lower part is about four feet long and attached to the upper part with a sliding knot. This lower part has one brake setting on it, and then runs down to another open end where you can use another sliding knot to attach the toggle.

Advantages:

• Moving a brake-setting can be done in the field in very little time.


• Having one fixed and dedicated brake loop means manufacturers can spend time on strengthening them. Brake-settings have blown up in the past.


• Total continuous control over where you put your brake-settings, allowing for full customization in regards to wind conditions, object height, object shape, etcetera.


• Less labour for trying new brake-settings, meaning more people will actually spend time to tune them properly.

Disadvantages:

• Requirements some sort of measuring and marking to remember where good brake settings are.


• Easier to screw up and create assymmetrical brake settings.


• A piece of fabric in the middle of your brake line with associated excess stows, which might cause problems when put in the tailpocket (tension knots?)


• Introduces extra complexity to the system.

Maybe somebody can come up with a better system for continuous and field-movable brake settings. Alternatively, can somebody shoot this idea down because of some obvious problem I'm overlooking?

Maybe it's just the fact that once properly tuned, people rarely need to change their brake settings.

Thanks,

Jaap

Edit: In case this is a good idea then credit goes to RiggerRob and Dexterbase. If it's a stupid idea, then it was obviously entirely mine.

Somebody much more knowledgable and experienced than I was kind enough to point out the slider and the difficulties it would have coming down if there was an obstacle along the way.

Duh...

Not entirely unsolvable I suppose, but it voids my idea.

Ever wonder why brakes don't come from the manufacturers with more than one or two brake settings? Seems that it is a very critical issue in safety and opening performance, but one that very few people do because they don't have bar-tack machines in their closet...

That's a very interesting point actually. Manufacturers should start selling "tune-lines".

Basically your canopy comes with three sets of steering lines. One pair is blank with no brake settings put on. Two other pairs have five or six brake settings on them, the difference between the two pair would be an half-a-setting offset.

You would take these "tune-lines" to a friendly object and jump them lots. Then once you figure out good brake settings, you grab your fresh set, have proper brake settings installed, and attach them to your canopy.

I would happily pay a little more (not sure how much) for some "tune-lines". Come to think of it, I can easily make a couple myself at my local rigger's loft. I think I got good settings already though, so...

Still sounds good for slider-down testing. I was thinking about just using my shallow-brakes setting and tying some knots in the line above the brake setting. However, I suspect the amount of line taken up by a single knot is way too much for this kind of adjustment.

Michael

Which is where the most critical testing takes place.

Jaap, if you'll manufacture me a set, I'll test them (a lot) this summer.

Or Chad? Or Marty? Anybody want to make me some?

I'll spend some time in the loft this weekend and see what I can come up with. Maybe I'll be able to bring something experimental with me to the Memorial boogie. I'd be more than happy to leave them behind then.

Cheers,

Jaap

how should a manufactor assume were your personal brake settings should be??
im happy the only comes whith one that way i dont need to remove more than one brake setting..

Im using 3 brakes settings on both my canopyes and see no problem whith it.. actualy i find it really nice and handy..

Presumably, they could acquire this information by testing a large variety of loadings (simulated jumper weights), and creating charts for each of their canopy sizes.

The manufactor can only do that from the correct wingload,many of us dosnt have that presice wingload,which means they cant set them besides if they know the weight of the pilot...

What i meant is,that i think the manufactors has desided to do the right thing..
When you buy a BASE canopy you can go jump it whith the brake setting that has been installed safely(to the sport)if you then deside to make new settings they didnt ruin your brake line by installing settings you might cant use....

Also in a sport as BASE you should atleast have the interest to config YOUR gear to fit YOU(changing or not dosnt really matter as long you feel good about it).It dosnt really mean that you should be a rigger(but would be handy..)but know what you want and can explain it to a rigger that then can make it...

Ive meet serval peolpe who didnt make serval brake settings as i have,they jump as safly as i do as they know their canopy aswell..besides perhaps the manufactor brake were fitting them..

Personaly i want my brakes set to my weight and jump,but its a personal sport were the only rules are:
dont die
dont get hurt
dont burn an object/get caught(not the same but similar)

another possible option would be to introduce a variable link between the brake line and the cascades.

collect the cascaded lines in a loop.
terminate the upper brake line in a loop.
feed a new line (with loops at both ends) through the upper brake line loop.
secure both free ends of this new line to the cascade loop via a Slink, or similar.

having several sets of these "connector lines" would permit rapid changing, and repeatable settings. just ensure the correct length is installed. (you can even color coat matching pairs.)

the single brake settings would move up or down the lines.

the toggles could be shifted accordingly (to maintain a consistent flair stroke).

all parts could be made at the factory.
no need for sewing to create new brake settings.

unfortunately, I don't have the tools, material, or bridge to experiment with this concept...

I've seen a similar strategy used to test brake settings (except it just involved moving the fingertrap at the top of the lower control line, and tacking it in place). Results were good, and it wasn't too hard to change out.

I assume this would be for use slider-down only? My concern with slider up would be that the extra bulk in the cascade attachment might cause the slider to hesitate coming down.

Michael

Tom is correct. test a prototype extensively slider down/off. prove that the mods have potential to make things better.

if so, then can it be refined to permit slider up operations? maybe reduce bulk by using Spectra (only in that region)?

if successful...
- jumpers will know which set is installed simply by checking in they're gear bag. (here are the reds, and the blacks, that means the GREENS are on the rig...)
- with only one brake setting, jumpers will KNOW they were set evenly.

I just had another thought on adjustable brake settings. It puts a little bit of a "bump" in the line, but at least may be appropriate for slider-down testing.

The idea is to take your lower control lines, say 12 inches above the brake settings, and finger-trap a third of a 12-inch piece of 900 lb dacron from about the 12-inch point to the 16-inch point. This can be bartacked in place or otherwise securely sewn. With the other two-thirds, skip about three inches and finger-trap from about the 9-inch point down to the 5-inch point. This leaves one inch of line coming back out at the 5-inch mark on the control lines. The bottom finger-trap should not be sewn in place.

To shorten your brake setting slightly, you would give a bit of a tug on the one-inch tail at the bottom. This will compress the three-inch gap in the middle. The four-inch lower finger-trap should take most of the force, but just for good measure you could throw a couple of turns of tacking through the control line and finger-trap.

My biggest concern about using this on slider-up jumps, I think, wouldn't so much be the deployment (worst case your slider would stall about 9 inches above the bumpers), but hesitation that might be caused by pulling the slack section through the slider grommets (for example when flaring).

For slider-down jumps it seems like a robust, simple way of adjusting the brake lines until you've found a setting that works. Someone want to check me on this?

Michael

Basic Research used to deliver their Fox canopies in the mid-90's with a two part brake line. The two looping parts joined at approximately 1.5 to 2 feet from the toggle. If I remember correctly, the reason for this was to save time and money when replacing worn out DBS.

The only problem occurred when you tried to flare and the "bump" where the two parts joined passed through the toggle keeper. Very often, the bump would get caught in the toggle keeper and you'd have a stuck toggle. I ended up sending my first Fox back to BR when I experienced this problem on a few test skydives. Slider coming down was not an issue.