Basejumper.com - archive

I wonder if anyone uses this style of packing: the three main folds (A-B, B-C, C-D folds), instead of being folded in half and put symmetrically on top of the buried tail before you stow the lines in tailpocket (like in this picture), are simply put on top of the tail and on top of each other (without folding them in half). (if this is a confusing description, I'll post pictures in a couple of days)

This results in tighter, thinner, and easier to control wrap that does not have tendency to unwrap itself as you put it in container. On fast openings (tested on two slider down 2s delay jumps and 2 terminal jumps) there's no noticeable effect on heading performance. On one 3s delay slider up, really mushy opening, I got a linetwist, not sure if it was induced by the asymmetry in the packjob or by unequal loading of the risers while sitting through snively opening.

Yes, that is the exact packjob I have done a few times, but for some reason I cannot find an efficient way to fold the topskin ears down, I have a ZP forskin Blackjack and its really slippery.

I really REALLY like the idea of this packjob and I think it makes more sense than standard final Z folds. this is a 'G' fold or whatever and the extraction mind experiment really works. I did a few of these at RGGFG '07, but quit because it took longer for me. I have done a few since then, slider up. I think this makes MUCH more sense for tracking/long delay/WS jumps as the extraction would be weighted well to hold heading performance.

If i could get this packjob faster, I would use it for all long delay/ws jumps, maybe all.

oh, and this is still a symmetric packjob.

When canopy is folded into container, I simply pull out the stripped center cell (the bridle attachment point, along with almost a foot of center cell's top skin) through the "G" folds, separating them into ears. But I have full-F111 canopy, maybe it makes difference compared to ZP.

after playing around with a couple new packjobs and not liking there heading performance (read 180 partly due to weird packjob), I have switched back to my old packjob (great OH performance) with a couple modifications and have had great openings since.


a-b Folded UP X2
b-c Folded UP X2
c-d Folded DOWN X1

Tail Flaked, folded in half and the outside piece of the tail is wrapped around the B's, C's, and D's.

I really like this packjob as it goes in the container really clean and dosent get smooshed and moved around much at all.

This is pack job that I use, except I dont fold the ears down between the folds.
I have very good su heading performance terminal and subterminal.
When I do the 2nd fold putting the canopy in the container I just clean up the ears a bit, don't have any problems keeping it clean while closing...

To me, this pack job makes the most sense, it orientates the folds in the proper opening order and restrictes the tail as well.

so, its not super clean by my making, but I tried it again last week. slider down.

Yes that is exactly what I do. In fact, to keep the air out I clamp down the "G" fold. Basically I fold the right side over, about the width of the tail pocket and clamp. Then I fold the left side over the same width and slip about half an inch in under the "right" clamps, in addition to the left clamps. The result is an neat pack job the width of the tailpocket that stays flat while I put it in the container. I don't fold my ears like you, I roll them in at the end when closing the bottom of my container.

In my 50 or so slider offs, I have always packed this way and haven't had any significant offheadings. I have done the same G folds without clamps at all with the same result.

You probably misunderstood my description, as your picture shows symmetrical packjob, with the three "main folds" (A-B, B-C, C-D folds) being folded in half symmetrically on top of the tail (in your picture, it's blue folds with the logo on jumper's right and yellow on the left, from top of the container to the bottom, symmetrically lying on top of the tailpocket). What I meant was that these folds are not folded in half, but rather put on top of each other with their full width (equal to container's width). I think VTflyer is talking about the same thing.

whatever fold u make, it does not really makes any changing on openings, as long the left and right side is symmetrical and balanced ( same mass on left and right side) Fold it like this or like that, or roll it or flake it...it does not change the opening speed. It change the time needed to finish the pack job only. What does make difference is; speed of line stretch (size of PC used controlling that segment of opening) and exposure of the nose ( leading edge) sometimes rubberband on C line attachment for slider affect the speed of opening too...

why dont u just roll it up in a ball and stuff it in your container

if u spend more than 10 minutes packing u should take up a new sport like golf

its not the packjob as much as it is your body position. just stuff the shit in and go.