Basejumper.com - archive

So I got the Rock Dragon in my second rig and put a few jumps on it. It's a pretty sweet canopy. My previous experience has all been with a similar size Troll. I will abstain from comparing the two for now except in the packing department.

When you pack tab-less canopies, you grab the fold in such a way that the vector of tension (for lack of a better word) continues in a straight line all the way down the line group. When you grab the tabs on the Troll, you pretty much do the same—as you tension the fabric, the lines become taut as well. The first two folds are usually of similar width, the third one a bit narrower.

When you grab the tabs on the Rock Dragon, the vector of tension is a little bit skewed, by about 2-3 inches. It doesn't go straight to the line. I am afraid I fail to see the logic behind this. Since the tabs are sewn like this on both sides and for all folds, this rules out a possible QC slip; it's clearly been done like this on purpose. The first fold is really wide, the second narrower, the third narrowest.

Now if you pack the RD as if there were no tabs, going straight by logic of how it should be folded, it looks much neater and packs up much more conveniently. See pictures attached.

This doesn't seem to affect the openings at all, of course.

So what is the logic behind placing the tabs the way they were placed if it makes for a sloppier-looking packjob that's harder to control?

This sounds like a question you should ask directly to the manufacturer. Here you will get only opinions.

-Bill

Speak to APEX and they should be able to help. Just to point out, the tabs on my Rock Dragon (bought 2 years back) are off by a bit from where they should be. I had shown this to Jimmy and he had made a note of it for future canopies.

Which ones? On my Rockdragon (bought a year and a half back) the tabs above the B line-group were off. I think Zennie had a similar problem.

I have a new (mfg 02/06) Rockdragon. I flat pack it with the tabs. It looks exactly the same as your 1st two images with tabs.

I sure emailed the manufacturer, but as many knowledgeable folks as there are on this forum, I figured I'd ask here as well.

Do you find it convenient, normal, and logical? It feels so "off" to me I almost itch to move the tabs a little, they just feel wrong, they tension the fabric in a wrong way.

Not a big deal by all means, though.

Usually if I fold the canopy in the wrong place, I get "warps" across the fold. By adjusting the location of the folds, I can get rid of these. A friend of mine bought a Troll MDV a couple years ago, and when he folded it by the tabs, the warps were there. To get rid of the warps, we had to move the folds a couple of inches away from the tabs.

I've always packed so the fabric lays flat. This also usually means the first two folds are about the same size, and the third one is smaller. I'd be interested to hear what the manufacturer says.

Michael

The first few Rock Dragons had the tabs in the wrong place. My fault, totally. I moved the tabs to the correct locations and this is where they are now. I have always had what I call the stair step where the folds get consecutively narrower with the fabric between the A-B line groups widest, B-C fold about 2 inches narrower, and the C-D fold about 2 inches narrower still. After reading this, I consulted with several jumpers/riggers to get outside opinions. Most say that this is how their pack jobs turn out. Marta and I know how to fly the canopies and have learned alot about their manufacturing, but don't have alot of first hand knowlege as to their actual construction. So I went to our partner Todd Shoebotham who has been building the FOX and the FLiK for years. He pulled a Rock Dragon off the shelf(he was not involved with the placement of the Dagger or Rock Dragon packing tabs, we were not partners at the time). Upon inspection of the packing tab placement, he said that they were in the correct location and wouldn't move them. To me, your initial pictures using the tabs is exactly how I like the canopy to look at that stage of packing. There is nothing wrong with how you have the pack job in the second set of photos, not using the tabs. As far as "ease of packing", I think that it is what you are used to which makes packing seem easier or more difficult. I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Jimmy P
Apex BASE

Yo !

WTF do you use "packing tabs" for? Will you ask about "clamps" next???

bsbd!

Yuri.

I have a Dagger and a Blackjack with ZPforeskin.
I like the blackjack better for every reason, but i have packed both of them in every way i deem possible, and the dagger flies awsome, but never packed like a dream, always like shit.
Seems to me that any packing either works, and the pack volume varies a bit.
but for volume, i recomend the nontabywheretheywantyou2use* way.



A rock dragon and a dagger are the same thing, just no 'ventybreathygofasterantideaththings'* on dagger.


*i declar that a word, if anybody was wondering.

This is the only canopy I've ever packed or owned, so it does feel normal to me. But I know just next to nothing...

To convince you that the sloppy, but free of line tension fabric "doesn't affect the openings at all, of course". In other words, to speed up your packing, so you can enjoy life more.

I second that

For the record:
The Rock Dragon and the Dagger are completely different canopies, designed for intentionally different flight characteristics. The Dagger was pre-vent and remains unvented, it is designed with a flatter glide slope and responsive toggle input. (For those interested, it also hook turns very smoothly, with none of the "shudder" that most seven cells have when one front riser is pulled down). It has an aspect ratio of 2.1:1
The Rock Dragon was designed with vents and sinking approaches in mind. It has a straight 2:1 aspect ratio. It is less responsive to toggle inputs and more docile than the Dagger, yet still turns and flares very nicely.
JP