Basejumper.com - archive

Hello, how many jumpers on this forum use TB (tail Bury)
packing method?

Have you really improved on heading performance by nose inflation first?

Any cons or particular attention required during packing?

Thanks for share your experiences!

Safe jumps...
Mariobat

This is the method I was taught, though I didn't realise it was called the tail bury till I searched and found this http://www.basejumper.com/...illey_Fold__896.html

In my limited experience I've had excellent heading performance, only 3 openings out of 21 that were off laser straight and 2 of those can be put down to cross wind, the other I'm unsure on the reason but it was pretty turbulent after opening. each off heading was around a 40deg off so nothing major.

I can't comment on any improvement as I've never used any other packing method.

Originally I was packing without clamps and was finishing my packjob by cocooning everything but the nose flakes with the tail of the center cell. I switched to the tail-bury method and began using clamps, as it allowed me to pack more quickly and confidently. Heading performance improved markedly.

I now attribute most heading performance problems to body position...body position, or if we're jumping As in stiff winds, the low-airspeed deployments in brisk tailwinds will sometimes encourage off-headings, but they're usually 90s or less and aren't too dramatic because the wind provides such immediate object separation.

One could argue that back when I was packing the old way it was amateur hour, and I could only nod and agree. I'm still a 100-jump chump. But this chump experiences fairly consistent openings with the tail-bury method.

Of course! Body position is 75% in on heading openings!
Thanks :)

i strarted packing the 'standard' way, and after 30 jumps switched to bury the tail. now have 350 jumps with various variations of this.
in the beginning of my tail-burying experience, i kept it completely symmetrical, folding it in 1/4ths each side on top to the middle.
as of recent i have been folding it into 1/3rds, seemingly asymmetrical, where the left side folds past the middle, and the right side folds on top of the left.
i have not used a tailgate several times now, and notice no difference in opening.

I was bored at work (office gig) a few years ago
and started experiementing with different ways
to narrow the basic pack job.

Eventually called Tom A and asked him about
what I was trying, his reply, "Oh, the Martin
Tilley folds..." etc.

The ONLY down side is for low freefalls with
minimal air speed I think the tighter pack
job takes a pinch longer to open but that
might just be perception.

Yes.

Highly recommend.

Slow mo video is very convincing

Thanks! Is there a link where I can find Slow Mot. Video?

Nice jumps And thanks again to everyone;)

I too would be very interested in seeing your slow motion video. Link please?

I have thousands of slider down openings in HD video and can't tell any overall difference in the openings between any of the narrowing fold methods.

Tom, in your experience have any reason to not racommend this
method?
Thanks

No.

I honestly don't think that the method used for narrowing the canopy makes any difference to the opening at all. I've seen lots of different methods and variations, and I can't see that they make any real difference.

I think the purpose of the narrowing folds is to get the canpy into the pack tray. Whatever folds accomplish that for you are what you should do.

For me, when I am packing student rigs, I tend to use the Tilley Fold (tail bury) method almost exclusively, but I do that for convenience and ease of closing, rather than for any other reason. Note that I do not do anything to the bottom edges (45's, or rolls, or folds, or whatever). I leave them straight across and them fold them over the top of the tail.

Thanks Tom and thanks to everyone has shared his experience/opinion!

I also use bury the ass. I was told by a buddy "dude you must try bury the tail", as if it were some kind of restaurant that I "had to eat at". I was assured that I would really feel the difference. Just a good whoosh of solid on heading, comfortable opening. I can't explain it, but when voicing my opinion to others about trying this method, it just "feels good", and reliable. Crisp, on-headings, powerful but not smacking you. That is the best way I could describe it. I must add that however wonderful the pack job, bad body position launching on your back to half barrel roll and an extremely low left shoulder on deployment can still put a big cement TV Tower in front of your face. ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)

this is the method i use and recommend...

as an overall packing method, i agree wholeheartedly with Martin Tilley that the "bury the tail" method is superior.

as far as improved heading performance, i couldn't really say... never had an offheading i couldn't attribute to body position or crazy x-winds while employing any packing method.

i tend to agree with Tom on this one... the folds don't really matter so much, just a means to get it in the container. but, i think this is the cleanest, fastest way to do it, and i believe you have a much lower possibility of a line over which is why i do not use tailgates, however, for the newly initiated, still recommend using them until making an informed personal decision. as is with everything in BASE!

Hi, I've been using the "tail burying" method for a bunch of jumps now. I am not aware of any evidence that this method is better or worse in terms of opening performance than any other method (someone please prove me wrong here), but I continue to use it because it feels easier to get it into the pack-tray symmetrically. And, I think most people would agree that a symmetrical pack job has a positive impact on opening performance.

I used to use a similar method where I would fold each side twice to meet them in the middle. Found that it worked great and you could see on opening that the tail would unravel last from the back middle. It worked great.

Then, a buddy of mine started folding one side all the way over followed by folding the other side completely over the first fold.
Super clean, easy to control, and we were able to fit a canopy in a container built two sizes smaller without excess pin tension. Now that is my go-to method. On headings so far just about every time for both of us. And it has made the closing sequence fast and clean.

Can you give us an idea of how many total jumps that is between the two of you? 100? 1000?

Not accurately. Maybe 300. Enough to conclude that it isn't blackdeath or the reason I may go in. it was just a really clean and fast way to narrow the pack. I used a spring scale to test pin tension both curled up and standing arched. Found that this method used the pack tray more evenly which freed up room and reduced pin tension.

Not giving advice our making recommendations, just sharing my results that seem pretty consistent thus far.

Is it because you're too lazy to put it or do you see some negative effect of tailgates? Or you don't see any improvement of tailgate?

Like Dunny said, it is really nice. And it makes perfect sence too, to bury the tail like that. Several jumpers in Romsdalen pack like this including my self and the openings are very good

It is my belief (unproven) that tailgates and their varying nature of tension and release are actually the possible cause or influence in bad heading performance in some cases. Also, with the line release mod in addition to burying the tail, I don't see a need. That is a personal decision and I don't blindly recommend not using one to just anyone.

I have at least 400 jumps overlapping the separate sides, I have experimented with alternating sides, and have seen no difference in heading performance.

I think it is more important to have a primary stow as close the stabilizers as possible, and folding or rolling the material in to prevent air from inflating one side before line stretch.

Sorry but I don't well understand :"as close The stabilizer", could you explan me well? Thanks
(sorry for my poor english!)

That's a really interesting point. I think I need to go watch some video and try some different bottom folds to see if they make a difference as the canopy travels to line stretch.

Well I finally got my busy but lazy self around to packing like Chuck Peters and can say I have had had 100% on heading openings with his method of tail folding, even though I was drunker than I should have been. 1 out of 1 perfect, yep I know it doesn't mean shit but I really like the method.

Haha, good stuff. cheers buddy, glad it's working for you!

Obviously it's not a cure-all, but having the primary stow against the stabilizers prevents any premature inflation(almost as bad as the other premature thingy); before the canopy reaches line stretch, and folding the material in assists.

Thats the theory anyway. Also stopped wrapping the center cell around the pack job slider down, only have the center cell channel about 4 inches wide, think that might help also...

Here is a thought. Maybe the primary stow creates a 'pivot point' - a potential (theoretical) problem for your SD, go&throw and x/tail-wind jumps. Just my thought, but then what do I know.

It's all theory anyway... So you don't use a primary stow? I could see that the primary stow could be a sort of pivot on low-speed deployments... Is it more or less likely to create an off heading than one side of the canopy inflating because there is nothing controlling the airflow into the bottom of the canopy before line stretch?

Do you not use a stow? Do you have jumps and experience to say it works well? I am not interrogating you - I'm just asking questions, it's interesting.

It's actually a very interesting question:

Is rotation on the way to line stretch more likely to be caused by air flowing into the bottom skin/stabilizers or by the weight of the canopy being assymetrically distributed as the bridle lifts it?

I suspect that either could cause off headings before the canopy hits line stretch.

I wonder how we could test which is a larger cause?

Would it vary by delay? On a static line it seems like the air flowing into the canopy would be zero. On a longer delay, would it be more?

Maybe I'll try to rig up some indoor test drops.

Isn't that also the theory behind DBagging VS Static Lines for low jumps? To remove that extra pivot point.

i saw it for the first time recently when visiting Romsdal.
i'm a pretty conservative guy when it comes to adopting new methods, but I immdediately saw the value to this and switched.
The only down-side i experieced was learning to adjust for extra bulk near the tail pocket when closing the container = no big deal.

I give it big thumbs up.

Craig

I have several hundred SD jumps with and without primary stow. I have not collected data pertaining to using either of the methods. I continue to use both methods. There are numerous factors that can affect heading performance. All of these must be manged. Ultimately you need to decide what makes you 'happy' at the exit point.

>>>I have several hundred SD jumps with and without primary stow.

What makes you decide when to use it?

I have used the primary stow every jump.

What would I save or gain by not using it?

How about the tailgate? Do you skip this?

I am curious, Thanks.

What happens if your lines shift in your tail pocket and you get line dump? Don't you worry that all that slack in your lines may cause the relative air to spin the canopy since nothings keeping it together until line-stretch?

Just curious, asking for my own education.

Just to clarify - I am not trying to promote one method over another. All I suggested was that, in theory, the primary stow may create a pivot point. I am not a big of getting into detailed discussions on a forum, since it is easy to get side-tracked or have misunderstandings because of different language or terms used.

@OutaBounZ: Sorry, I am not quite sure I understand your question. With my definition of line dump and they way I do a primary stow, I do not see how the primary stow would prevent a line dump. I know that some canopy manufacturers make tight fitting tailpockets whilst others make pretty loose ones. Again, the placement of my primary stow would not affect the lines inside the tailpocket. I have plenty of rear facing video that shows that the way I pack keeps my packjob pretty much 'together' until I reach linestretch. Canopy inflation occurs once my body loads the canopy. What I was theorizing was that a primary stow may create a pivot point which makes it easier for the canopy to turn around before canopy inflation. As I said, I just pointed out another theory, rather than trying to state any fact.

@Greenmachine: When I started out, I naturally packed as guided by my mentor. At that time, with my limited experience, I used a primary stow for four reasons: a) my mentor advised me b) I found it easier to stow the lines in the tailpocket with a primary stow c) it was easier and 'neater' to slide the packjob into the bottom of the container d) I like to standardize my packjob as much as possible - since my mentor advised me that I had to use a primary stow for SU, and I could see no downside for using the primary stow for SD, I decided to always use the primary stow. As I progressed in the sport I experimented with various packing methods and techniques to come up with something that works for me (remember, only change one thing at a time and repeat several time - if safe). Over time factors a), b) & c) became less relevant. The deciding factor weather I was using the primary stow or not was probably the size of the tailpocket (I always found the tailpocket on the Apex Flik to be large). About 18 months ago I got a new canopy, which I packed as usual. On my first jump I had an off heading (which is unusual). However, I had changed a number of things - a new canopy (different design and size), a different PC (different design & size) and I was doing a go&throw (too see how high I would open up on new canopy). I re-did the same jump under the same conditions another three times with the same result - off heading to the left. (I did change the way I attached the bridle to the canopy and PC to bridle - used slinks to be completely in line). Subsequently I discussed this (face-to-face) with someone vastly more experienced than me and one of the things we discussed was the primary stow and the theoretical pivot point. I then did a few test pulls during my next packjob (i.e. pulling the lines out of the tailpocket once stowed.) It is my understanding for a primary stow to do what it is supposed to do (i.e. keep the lines at the canopy end together until line stretch) you need the wrap/s to be tight, but not too tight (i.e. a single wrap is not strong enough). Consequently, it does take a little bit of force for the lines to come free. Based on my 'pull test' observations, I concluded that the pivot point theory may have some validity. I did not use the primary stow and had an on-heading opening. I did not use the primary stow for the next 10 jumps or so and had no offheadings. I then decided to test the validity of the theory and packed with the primary stow and - had an onheading opening. A few more jumps with a primary stow and all on heading. Consequently, the theory remains inconclusive. This said, I have had more off-headings with a primary stow than without on that canopy, so not using one makes ME 'happy' at the exit point. Of course that is based on the way I pack. I should also mention that the tailpocket is 'perfect' size for my liking. Additionally the user manual recommends the use of the primary stow.

Finally, yes, I use a tailgate.

C ya

Didn't say it would prevent it (however, it could). Just that it keeps the canopy from inflating until you reach line stretch so you don't fall 15 feet away to be stopped by an already open canopy. To the best of my limited knowledge, the three things that prevent line dump are properly maintained velcro on the tail pocket. Neat figure 8's of the lines in the tail pocket, and last (and least) using the primary stow as a source of reefing until line stretch because an inflated canopy before line stretch can cause you to fall away from your canopy at a increased rate relative to your now partially inflated canopy's fall rate.

These are just things that I have been taught early on when I would question everything I was being taught by my mentor. I'm not saying one reason is more right. I am simply asking questions to further my understanding of the pro's and con's of varying methods being used.

Cheers!