Basejumper.com - archive

Many active BASE folks consider the vented Fox to be the most reliable, most tested, most trusted, most predictable canopy on the market today (the Mojo is a decent canopy, but with no bottom-skin venting it is, indeed, old technology). While there is, as Tom says, new technology available in the Flik and the Blackjack/Ace, opinions are decidedly mixed on these canopies (at least on the latter).

I do my share of "cutting edge" jumps I suppose, and I'll trust my fat ass to a vented Fox and let other folks be guinea pigs with new canopy designs for a few years before I jump in the pool. I'll trade 10 units of fancy goo-gads for one unit of predictability when the chips are down.

Anyway, one Dog's (alternate) opinion of canopy characteristics.

Peace,

D-d0g
ddog@wrinko.com
www.wrinko.com

Don't forget Vertigo. Vertigo also offers vents on the bottom of the daggers they make. They have the option available.
That's all. Fairness for all. Vertigo also offers vented technology.
Why fight about who has it? Let's all be safer, and jump longer. More? No. The odds are stacked against us BASE jumpers in simple math.
The more we jump = the more we die.
Simple math. So, who wants to dis Robin Heid here, because he only has around 100 jumps? I think he is smarter because he picks and chooses his jumps.
Let me guess. I am doing dirty laundry again?
Peace,
Thomas

"Can't we all just get along?"

Excellent points. Maybe we can split this canopy discussion off and move it into the BASE forum, and see if it develops into a technical discussion...

Thanks for chiming in, Doug. Now if only you could figure out how the zipper thing works.

Would you mind sharing some of those opinions? (both positive and negative)

Thanks

I have reproduced D-dOg's comments from the ABA Forum thread entitled "Vtec v. Blackjack v. Ace". I couldn't figure out how to create a link directly to the thread, so I hope it's ok to cut and paste this bit...


I don't agree with D-dOg, but I do have a great deal of respect for his opinions.

I personally have found the Blackjack highly responsive. It does lose altitude very quickly in a hard riser turn, and I think that yanking a riser too hard in an emergency can be a bad response with this canopy. I believe that you can practice riser corrections, though, and actually get better response from the Blackjack than from any other canopy (with proper technique and practice). I believe this bit "...one jumper feels that very strong canopy pilots can master this twitchiness and turn it to an asset..." is a reference to my views.

Were it at your Blackjack you had a line over?

No, the lineover was on my Troll.

I do not believe the canopy design was at fault in the line over. That malfunction was probably caused by pure Black Death, poor packing or the pack job shifting around in transit after packing. I tend to think it was just bad luck--statistically it will happen eventually.

I agree
I were just thinking on the fligth,in wich i thourgth were in a Blackjack(i saw the video),and saw the gentel touch while you landed.My landing didnt look like that at all.In both landings it were risers landings.

Thanks for bringing those comments over from the ABA, Tom. While I do stand by my comments therein, I also want to emphasize once again that I've NEVER jumped a Blackjack myself. In the interest of full disclosure, an extremely good friend of mine also died while jumping this canopy; it is not possible, emotionally, for me to be objective about whether the canopy had a substantive involvement in the incident.

Objectively, I can say that I am jumping a Fox right now and am sticking with this generation of technology until convinced there are solid reasons to move on. I believe that, for 95% of BASE folks on 95% of jumps, the consistency and generally forgiving nature of the Fox (with vents) is the optimal canopy. There are certain jumps - and certain jumpers - where another technology may be marginally superior. However, so often in BASE we end up jumping the canopy that we have packed - if I am going to have one packed canopy in my trunk for any given jump, I'll take a vented Fox over anything on the market, bar none.

I'm not sponsored by Basic Research (who make the Fox), I don't get discounts on gear from them, etc. I also have nothing but good things to say about Consolidated Rigging (who make the Blackjack); most of my 200 jumps have been done on a CR Mojo, in fact.

So, again, these are my opinions and are not meant as the definitive answer. Tom has different opinions, and as everyone knows, Tom has more jumps than I and knows more about gear than I do. In a fistfight, however, I'd kick his gimpy ass

Peace,

D-d0g
ddog@wrinko.com
www.wrinko.com

Anyone ever get jumps on a dagger? Wish to share any thoughts on the dagger from Vertigo?
My only jumps were on a Dragon, which Vertigo sells, but I am not sure they manufacture. This is the canopy that came with my sorcerer. Thoughts:
Fun canopy. Good openings of the 4 I had, and it flew nice. Flew a little fast for some jumps, but I never got the chance to do any deep brakes approaches. I was usually jumping in higher winds, so the extra speed helped. One time I needed to use front risers to gain some forward speed and clear some trees. I was glad the Dragon had the zip in it. Oh yeah, it was Dragon 235, and I weigh around 175, so a fairly high wing loading for BASE jumping. I kept it in mostly clean landing areas though.
It also had an 8 footish bridal, and a 38 ZP pc on it. Nice set up for my 6-7 second delays, but a terrible set up for Idaho. In fact, I was not even crazy enough to jump the bridge with this set up.
Maybe that is where I got my name, but I thought I had it before that action.
Just my.02 on the Dragon, the only OTHER BASE canopy I have jumped.
Peace,
Thomas
oh, a side note. My dragon had Microlines on it. This was to help fit it into the sorcerer, but something to definitely take notice of. More snap, less stretch. I think this would make a difference on slider off/down jumps.

ABA Forum would do the trick.

I've been mentally filing away odd snippets of information on gear selection for a couple of years and now that I want to start BASE I'd pretty much chosen a Fox Vtec with Multi as the "best" option for a beginner, but I had difficulty listing all the reasons why to myself.

This changed when I saw D-dOg's post on the ABA board a couple of days ago. All the observations that he made struck a definite chord with stuff that I've picked up from other people or the BASE boards.

The one negative aspect that I've heard about the vented Fox from a couple of people is that it can open too promptly on longer delays, but I'm ready to accept that appropriate packing could tame that a tad.

I'd be interested to know if anyone disagrees with D-dOg's post, before I throw a considerable amount of money at a vented Fox, rather than a used Mojo.

Cheers,
Ron

Please give feedback on the ACE as well??
Thanks

From ample firsthand experience, I'd say that worries about "hard openings" from vented canopies are unwarranted for two reasons:

1. Slider-up, packing tricks are easily learned to slow openings of any canopy - though, let it be noted that on average these tricks will increase off-heading probabilities and require expert knowledge to use effectively. That said, there's not excuse not to learn them if you plan to do lots of 8+ second slider-up delays on your canopy, vented or otherwise.

2. Slider-down, the only place this is going to matter is in the world of deeper-than-3 second deployments (at less than 3 seconds slider down, there's really not such a a thing as a "hard opening;" just not enough airspeed). In my experience, very very VERY few folks are actually taking (consistent) 3+ second delays slider-down. I can count the number on one hand, in fact, on a global basis (though surely there are more than I know personally. . . I'm merely making the point of relative scarcity). Taking slider-down delays between 3 and 4+ second is a game only for those with a stout constitution and a taste for pain - the openings, no matter what canopy, are HARD. There are no packing tricks to slow them down noticeably. While there might me a small increase in "hardness" between a vented and unvented canopy at, say, 3.5 seconds, this is like saying that 120 volts of electricity hurts "more" than 115 volts (amperage held constant); they both hurt a great deal.

The benefits of canopy venting far, far outweight the perceived cost of "harder openings." In fact, almost no jumpers will experience these hard openings slider-down, and no jumper need consistently experience them slider up (see packing tricks above).

Analogy: a car with better brakes (ABS, for example) stops faster. Would you worry about how much the seatbelt hurts when it holds you in as you are using those better brakes? No, not generally - in fact, your darned happy those brakes are stopping you so fast!

The hardest "opening" in the world is the snively piece-of-crap that puts you into the talus with a partially-inflated canopy over your head. Right, Tom?

Peace,

D-d0g
ddog@wrinko.com
www.wrinko.com

ps: the Ace is simply the Blackjack without venting (and valves) - thus, I'd recommend doubly against it, for it has the airfoil and flight characteristics of the latter, without the benefits of venting.

How long have they offered this option? I can't find it on their web page, or their order forms.

Do you have any more info about this? Cost? Valves or vents?

This is the first I've heard about it.

Check this maybe:
http://www.vertigobase.com/html/prod_pricelist.htm

If you scroll down to the bottom, where it lists Labor, you will find many options that vertigo offers. One is Vent installation. If I remember correctly, this is simply what it says. Vent installation. Does not even need to be a Vertigo Product. Something to the tune of "if you want to send in your fox to get it retro-fitted with vents, we will do that. Just make sure it is clean." I read that in Skydiving I think, I can't remember which issue though. I will look through my old mags, and see if I can find it. Something like around the time Vents were introduced. Say, somewhere around Moab 2000? I remember hearing about DW test jumping a vented canopy. I think it was around beginning of 2000.
But, as always, I could be wrong.
Peace,
Thomas

Thanks. I'm not very current on Vertigo gear. Discussions like this are very helpful to me.

One criticism of the Fox Vtec that I've heard from a couple of people is that the flare is fairly "mushy" due to the vents.

What's been your experience as far as the flare goes as compared with other canopies?

The full flight flare of my FOX got noticeable worse when I had the vents retrofitted onto it. Still, since full flight flare is about tenth down my list of priorities for a BASE canopy (which I almost never land from full flight anyway), this doesn't worry me much.

I've also noticed that toggle response in full flight turns feels odd--it's as if the canopy "slides" sideways. Full flight toggle turns are something I never do on BASE approaches, though.

Getting valves to cover the inlets (now available from BR, as well as CR and Morpheus/Atair) solves this problem nicely.

These are just my personal views. I may be in the minority on some of these, and there is no consensus on any of them among experienced jumpers. I’m basing my thoughts on approximately 200 jumps on an unvented FOX (with multi), 150 on a Vtec FOX (with multi), 100 on a Mojo and 100 on a Blackjack.

Vents:

I pretty much only jump vented canopies. There are lots of reasons for this, which I will not go into here.

I would not recommend a vented (or valved) canopy for a beginner. Deep brakes can cause a canopy with bottomskin inlets to backsurge on opening. Shallow brakes can cause any canopy to surge forward on opening. The opening backsurge phenomenon is poorly understood (and unresearched). Most BASE gear manufacturers have taken to covering up that problem (rather than addressing it) by simply lightening the standard brake settings, removing deep brake settings, and not telling anyone about the problem. This means that most new vented canopies will surge forward on opening. Most inexperienced BASE jumpers will not realize this, and will not know (because the manufacturers, by and large, are not telling them) that they need to customize their brake settings. Kudoz to Morpheus/Atair, the only manufacturer I know of that is trying to address, rather than hide, this issue.

Uncovered secondary inlets (vents) also degrade glide angle and flare power. Valved inlets preserve these characteristics.

In my opinion, secondary (bottom skin) inlets are suitable only for experienced jumpers. I love my Blackjack, and I’m very happy with my Vtec FOX, but I wouldn’t put someone off for their first jumps on either canopy.

Multi:

I am not convinced that the multi has any real effect on deployment. Roughly half my jumps have been on multi-equipped canopies, and I honestly can’t tell the difference. Since the multi adds both cost and complexity to the BASE system, I wouldn’t bother with it, for either beginner or advanced jumpers.

FOX

The FOX is a proven performer. It is solid, easy to pack and can take tons of abuse (mine has 14 patches, and around 50 water landings—and I still jump it). However, the slider down openings of an unvented FOX are somewhat inconsistent. I have found that the canopy reaches bottom skin expansion (initial pressurization) at about the same rate as other canopies, but then lags behind in cell inflation (full pressurization). This makes it slower to initial riser response than either the Mojo or Ace. The same design characteristic (shallow angle of attack) that creates this pressurization issue (and gives it a very good glide angle), makes the FOX “mushy” in deep brakes. The stall point is earlier in the riser stroke than a Mojo, Troll, or Ace, and the canopy has difficulty with steep, braked approaches. Note that the FOX’s issues are very well addressed by adding secondary inlets (vents or valves), but that (see above) I do not recommend secondary inlets for a beginner.

I think the standard FOX is pretty much done. I think the Vtec FOX is a good canopy for an experienced, conservative jumper. I wouldn’t recommend either for a beginner.

Mojo

The Mojo is also a well proven canopy. It has a steeper angle of attack than the FOX, and hence shorter time to full pressurization. This also means that it has superior deep braked approaches, but less glide angle and a weaker flare than the standard FOX (but better than the Vtec FOX).

I wouldn’t be doing any cutting edge BASE on a Mojo (I’m old already—I can hear a lisping Aussie saying “back in the day, we use to do 175 foot freefalls on standard Mojos!”). But, I think it’s a great canopy for a beginner to bang out their first 100 or so jumps on. And, they’re pretty easy to find used (and cheap).

Ace

The Ace is hands down better than the Mojo. It has a wider control range, flying both faster (and with much better glide) and slower (and steeper) than either the FOX or Mojo. This added flight range is a great help in hitting landing areas. Additionally, it pressurizes cleaner and more consistently than either of the earlier canopies. This is partly due to a steep angle of attack, but mostly due to changes in the actual wing profile (kudos to Consolidated Rigging and Atair, for realizing that the first step in designing a new wing ought to be to look at the actual airfoil). While the Ace’s pressurization is not as clean as a canopy with secondary inlets, it is far better than any un-vented canopy I’ve seen.

The Ace is the highest performance BASE airfoil I’ve jumped. This has big advantages if you take the time to learn to fly it. It can sink extremely well (perhaps a touch worse than the Troll, but better than anything else), and is super-responsive to control (either riser or toggle) input. This can be dangerous if you don’t learn to fly it (or are uncurrent on it). I believe that appropriate riser pressure is more important on the Ace than previous canopies. If you yard on a riser, you spin around fast. This means that you also lose altitude fast. If you are not aware of this, you can sink yourself into real trouble in a hurry. But if you know the canopy, and fly it well, this responsiveness is a tremendous asset.

My vote would be for a used Mojo over that vented FOX. If you’re feeling rich enough for new, I’d go for the Ace.

All right, enough rambling.

[2. Slider-down, the only place this is going to matter is in the world of deeper-than-3 second deployments (at less than 3 seconds slider down, there's really not such a a thing as a "hard opening;" just not enough airspeed). In my experience, very very VERY few folks are actually taking (consistent) 3+ second delays slider-down. I can count the number on one hand, in fact, on a global basis (though surely there are more than I know personally. . . I'm merely making the point of relative scarcity). Taking slider-down delays between 3 and 4+ second is a game only for those with a stout constitution and a taste for pain - the openings, no matter what canopy, are HARD. There are no packing tricks to slow them down noticeably. While there might me a small increase in "hardness" between a vented and unvented canopy at, say, 3.5 seconds, this is like saying that 120 volts of electricity hurts "more" than 115 volts (amperage held constant); they both hurt a great deal.]

Funny..
while im much at my own here,my instructer told me that first at 4,5plus sek you would feel like getting kicked,also he said that in 5sek plus there are dangere to for the lines to brooke,and dammaged to the cannopi.Thats the reasson i took my Fox225 non vent good used for a 4sek delay,the day i got hurt.Now i realize that i maybe were told wrong.That it more was a accident waiting to happend,instead of pure unluck..Any thourgt?

Stefan Faber

[2. Slider-down, the only place this is going to matter is in the world of deeper-than-3 second deployments (at less than 3 seconds slider down, there's really not such a a thing as a "hard opening;" just not enough airspeed). In my experience, very very VERY few folks are actually taking (consistent) 3+ second delays slider-down. I can count the number on one hand, in fact, on a global basis (though surely there are more than I know personally. . . I'm merely making the point of relative scarcity). Taking slider-down delays between 3 and 4+ second is a game only for those with a stout constitution and a taste for pain - the openings, no matter what canopy, are HARD. There are no packing tricks to slow them down noticeably. While there might me a small increase in "hardness" between a vented and unvented canopy at, say, 3.5 seconds, this is like saying that 120 volts of electricity hurts "more" than 115 volts (amperage held constant); they both hurt a great deal.]

Funny..
while im much at my own here,my instructer told me that first at 4,5plus sek you would feel like getting kicked,also he said that in 5sek plus there are dangere to for the lines to brooke,and dammaged to the cannopi.Thats the reasson i took my Fox225 non vent good used for a 4sek delay,the day i got hurt.Now i realize that i maybe were told wrong.That it more was a accident waiting to happend,instead of pure unluck..Any thourgt?

Stefan Faber

Stefan. Yeah, I have a little thought left. Let me see if I can pull it out of somewhere. Pop, here it is.
Hey, now I can sit down.
4.5 sec slider off range is PURE ABUSE in my mind. Not only to a canopy, but also to a body. I have seen one or two people here in the states take a healthy 3 second delay slider off. I just checked BR's chart, 600 foot, 4 second delay = bad idea. Not to pick it apart, as it is only recommendations, but I see a slider is poor performance off a 486 foot bridge.
I have a bigger problem to contend with. As some of you know, I have some metal in my back that acts as a vertebrae (can't say I'm spineless). So, I feel very hesistant to take more than a 2 second slider off/down delay. In fact, when I jump my favorite bridge, I have begun to put the slider on. Sliders are not the only key though.
What I have found is that my mesh slidered/vented Fox cracks open almost as hard on a two second delay than if I had no slider on at all. The cure to this was to simply take my delays a little deeper. I think the theory behind this is that a slider is designed to fight the wind. at 2 second, there may not be enough wind to take advantage of having a slider on. A term comes to mind: Slider Rebound.
And supposedly it helps to rubber band the slider to the center C lines as "direct control". I can't say if it helps or not, as I have not near the experience to determine that one. Maybe slider control could be another discussion?
Why not put the slider up when taking a 4 second delay? The object I have running through my head is around 600 feet? So, if taking a 4 second delay, I can see where the slider off part comes in. It fits into what we were discussing in the "Low Pulls" thread. Pulling around 200 feet, a person would desire a quick opening. Maybe not that quick though. If I recall, it was a blown toggle after opening? That could easily have came from a 4 second slider off delay, in my mind.
Wait, my mind is goofy, so anything I say should be taken for entertainment value only.
Peace,
Thomas

To me it sounds like the vented Fox simply exhibits different opening characteristics in terms of surge, which have been addressed by making the deep brakes setting slightly shallower. If the backsurge problem was inconsistent enough that the brake setting has to be made a lot shallower, so that normal forward surges are much greater than unvented canopies, then this is a real issue to this beginner.

Is that what you're saying: that the vented Fox will typically surge more than an unvented canopy?


I'm pretty keen on simplicity and keeping cash in my pocket too but, along with vented small and medium sized PCs, the multi looks and seems like a good logical idea. I'd be interested to hear any negative experiences with the multi in terms of potential problems and packing hassle.



I'm not sure I want a fast flying canopy for a first BASE canopy, I think I'd prefer to get into trouble more slowly. Whilst taking shorter delays for the forseeable future, the additional altitude would make the inferior glide angle of a vented Fox more of a nonissue. I've concluded that as experience and longer delays come I'd simply work with the different flight characteristics and plan jumps accordingly.

Everything you say about the superior responsiveness about the Ace seem to be inappropriate for a beginner. I like the idea of having a better range of flight, both glide and steep approach, but twitchy behaviour sounds less than ideal.

Thank you for taking your time to voice your observations and share your knowledge.
Ron

There were no damage on me or the gear,becours the opening.
I does belive that i lost my toggel,becours the opening/bad placement of the toggle.
I didnt feel the opening that hard(maybe im just too used to slider off).but the video did count 4sek.I dont know if the fackt of its old(350jumps) and non vent could say anything in this..
Fact is fact i didnt fly it as well as Tom did(on the risers)

You are correct that an older canopy will open softer on deep slider-down delays (however, jumping ratty gear to decrease the pounding can be scary too). You are also correct that going deep slider down can blow toggles (I use a custom pin setup with the toggles in part to alleviate this problem). I've actually broken three brake lines taking deep slider down delays - this is a very unpleasant experience, as the opening initiates a pretty violent spinning malfunction.

As to landing with risers, practice makes perfect! Pack your BASE rig in a skydiving container (if possible) and jump it at a DZ, landing rear risers. Many of us believe that it is possible to get a better landing using one riser and one toggle, versus throwing away the second toggle altogether and landing both rear risers - again, this requires practice. In any case, it is possible to land rear risers with BASE canopies very well - but hard to do the first time!

Some comments on Tom's feedback:

1. Multi: I agree that it is hard to know if there is a stastically valid impact on openings with the multi. However, it is pretty much uncontested that the multi has never been known to cause problems. Consequently, many jumpers feel that the potential benefit (still unproven, but hypothetically there) is worth the risk - which is, practically speaking, zero. It's cheap insurance, and I'd never buy a new canopy without a Multi. The "complexity" Tom is worried about is not very complex at all - if you can't pack up your Multi correct, you shouldn't be jumping!

2. Venting: it is worth noting that Tom is very, very, very much in the minority that venting is not for beginning jumpers. All the reasons that venting matters (better openings, better riser input, better correction from off-headings, faster pressurization on opening, ability to back away from objects with double riser input without canopy collapse, and finally faster re-inflation of canopy of nose is dragging down a cliff face after a 180 cliff strike) apply to beginners just as much (if not more so) as more advanced jumpers. The only "downside" of venting, as Tom says, is probably a slightly less powerful flare stroke. This is both not terribly important on 95% of BASE jumps (we rarely land from full flight), and pretty much solved with new valving technology offered by all the gear manufacturers. So why are vents not good for beginners? See below for more discussion.

3. Brake settings: Tom argues that somehow vented canopies require brake setting adjustment out of the factory more than non-vented canopies. I think this is bunk. ANY canopy, shipped from the factory, MUST have its brake settings customized for the jumper. Gear manufacturers guess at brake settings based on the weight you provide them, but it's a guess! You'd be beyond reckless to take a new rig out and jump non-custom brake settings on a tech object first go: venting or otherwise is irrelevant.

True, some manufacturers have a rep for setting "factory" brakes really shallow. ALL gear manufacturers INSIST that jumpers must customize their brakes. Again, venting or not is irrelevant. If you jump gear without custom brakes, you are rolling the dice on objects where an off-heading could result in object strike.

Remember, we set our brakes custom so that, when we open, the canopy is (ideally) stalling, falling straight down. Why? So that, if we get a 180, we can turn away from the object (without releasing brakes) using rear risers, rather than having lots of forward speed on opening (brakes too shallow) and, on a 180, flying into the object even before we can do anything to turn away.

Brake settings too deep result in either a stall, a generally snively/crappy opening, or even backwards flight. Yes, it is true that a vented canopy has the ability to "fly backwards" much more than an unvented one, but if you set brakes too deep on both and jump, the results are going to be equally bad. Unvented, the canopy will pressurize very poorly, respond to toggle/riser input VERY slowly immediately after opening, and generally behave like crap until it gets some forward drive to pressurize (remember, it NEEDS forward drive to pressurize - air enters the cells only through the nose inlets). Vented, the canopy will still pressurize, and will be reasonably responsive - but will stall backwards at a slow rate. Not good if you ass is scraping a wall after jumping an underhung object, but in my book still much better than having an unpressurized, unsteerable nonvented canopy over my head!

So why is it that a vented canopy needs custom brakes more than an unveted one? I don't get that argument at all. If anything, I'd argue the reverse - a vented canopy still pressurizes with brakes too deep, while an unvented one just turns into a big jellyfish over your head.


Bottom-skin venting is a technolgy that is qualitatively better than its predecessor technology in BASE. There is no reason for any jumper to be jumping non-vented canopies today (other than economics: unvented canopies are really cheap on the aftermarket, which tells you what "the market" thinks of their worth relative to their vented brothers). There are many experienced jumpers who have sold off all of their unvented canopies and now jump only vented canopies - they are safer, they are better. Too, there are precious few of us who will freefall sub-200 foot stuff with unvented canopies any more (Aussies being the exception, as usual).

As to beginners, I recently taught a new jumper and I did so with a vented Fox. I'd never think of pitching a student off with unvented gear on his/her early jumps - more than anyone, a student needs the extra pressurization, faster responsiveness, and generally more tolerant behavior of a vented canopy if things get bad (at least this is the case if the objects being jumped have object strike potential - otherwise, the argument becomes essentially academic as venting is all about object strike prevention and response everywhere but in super-low freefall situations).

In fact, I'd argue 180 degress from Tom: an experienced jumper (like Tom or I), if he is really "on his shit," can fly an unvented canopy almost as well as a vented one. We know how to massage them if things get bad, we know their riser input characteristics, we're likely to have our brakes set properly on them in the first place, and we're generally better able to respond to a bad off-heading since (unfortunately) we've had more than a few in our BASE career so we aren't so surprised.

A student? She'll be staring at a cliff face, yanking on a rear riser with an unveted canopy, and nothing's happening. . . .

Recommending unvented canopies to new BASE jumpers is like recommending a car without seatbelts to new drivers.

(standard caveats apply: Tom has more jumps than I, and knows more about gear than I do - I'm just a smelly old Dog!)

Peace,

D-d0g
ddog@wrinko.com
www.wrinko.com

See: Lukas and Per in the BLiNC technical archives.


I'm pretty sure the Swedes ended up removing their Multi's altogether.


This may be a matter of perspective. As a PDX guy, you're probably exposed to more BR thoughts on the matter. In general, the CR thinking is opposite. I don't think it's fair to characterize me as "very, very, very much in the minority". I can think of at least six jumpers with more than 400 jumps (including a major gear manufacturer) who are also in my "minority."



I could not agree more. It scares me that so many people are doing this, and that some manufacturers don't tell people to customize their deep brake settings.


Not true. BR has removed all suggestions for DBS customization from their documentation and gear. When I inquired as to the reason, they responded that the bottom skin vents created "weirdness" with deep settings, so they had removed their factory "deep" setting, and were shipping all canopies with the "shallow" setting only. What scares me is that they didn't even tell people this, they just started shipping shallow braked canopies to new jumpers--with no notes on customizing DBS, and no instruction to do so. Worse, CR followed suit, and now ships Blackjacks with only the one "shallow" brake setting, rather than a "best guess" custom DBS they used before (fortunately, CR does include a note on DBS).

I believe that this statement, in the BR owner's manual, reflects their view on jumpers installing their own (gasp!) customized deep brake setting:


This thread has another good illustration of BR's "no DBS" policy, and it's impact on new jumpers (this guy didn't customize his brakes because it would have been "against the manufacturer's recommendations" to do so).

I don't know about Vertigo, but the only manufacturer that I know tries to customize DBS based on body weight is Morpheus.


If you set the brakes for minimal forward on a canopy, then cut vents in the same canopy, and jump it, it will backsurge on opening. With vents, you can be faced with a choice between surging forward (what BR chooses to do with their canopies) and surging backward. While I feel that, for me, the riser responsiveness gains of secondary inlets overcome this problem (I can often pre-empt the surge by applying early riser input and getting a response), I do feel that a beginner should have a little more time to grab the risers. It's a bit like jumping into an already moving car, and trying to avoid the crash it's headed for. With an unvented canopy, you're driving a big truck, and it's going 5 mph. With a vented canopy, you're driving a highly responsive sports car, but it's going 20 mph. I'd rather see a beginner driver in the slow truck.


A vented canopy with overly deep brakes backsurges on opening. I'd rather see a beginner "jellyfishing" straight down than backsurging into an object.


And I am one of them. But there are many experienced skydivers who have sold off all their F-111 PD 9 cells--does that mean that students should be jumping VX's?


I tend to think it's like recommending a big truck, rather than a racy sports car. The sports car is cool (like a hot swooping canopy), and everybody wants one eventually, but you're probably safer to start in a big slow, simple truck (like student skydiving gear).

Hey Doug, do you feel like we've rehearsed this show, and are now giving it as a performance for the benefit of the skydivers at DZ.com?

[humorous aside]
"They just used to open facing the cliff--and we all just accepted it! We just though, oh yeah, that happens, you just have to be on it."[/humorous aside]

Edited to illustrate that BR is giving a "no DBS" recommendation.

Sorry, now I'm just thinking aloud.

If a canopy can fly both faster and slower, and glide both steeper and shallower, what is the downside?

It's not too hard to grab your toggles and hold the canopy back. In fact, it's standard practice on all BASE approaches (with any canopy) anyway. If you're going to be flying in half brakes anyway (and you should be), what is the negative of having more control range available on both the top and bottom end?

I guess the downside might be that you would mis-use the greater range of the canopy--same reason you don't give a student a Stiletto. Let me think about that a bit.

Hmmm. This is starting to sound like a conversation that Doug and I had in Amsterdam a while back. Maybe the Flying Dutchman will pop in here on a bicycle in a minute...

Do you have a pic? i cant se this for me..


What did you do Tom?Know there were a slider,but did you cut both?


Can you tell how you do this?Is it good enouf yhat i feel good or does i need one more to watch?

Thanks for this info.It helps me alot.

I kept the right toggle in my hand, but flare on both the rear risers. This was the technique I learned when I first started jumping, and I haven't re-visited it in a while, but it seemed to work out ok for me.

In general, the people I have heard referring to "keeping the toggle" were referring to this technique.

Doug, have you practiced landing with an actual toggle stroke on the other side? I tried that one weekend, ate it about three times, and gave it up. I'd be curious for tips on how you manage it.


Case in point. Many people are BASE jumping without customizing their DBS. BASE manufacturers need to start (or resume) including DBS instructions with their gear.

Read this from the BLiNC Technical Archives.

About halfway down I've posted a common method for finding DBS on a non-vented canopies. Note that following this method for a vented canopy will likely yield a DBS that creates opening backsurge. Read the rest of the thread, too. Dwain is perhaps the world's best BASE jumper, and his strike avoidance technique is the best one I've seen.

The best way I've found for identifying good DBS on vented canopies involves sewing in multiple brake settings, and making a bunch of jumps off a friendly span while switching between them.

If this is the case, what they're doing is just "WRONG". When I got my Fox VTEC, I was told the manufacturer DBS is customized optimally for the given wingloading and canopy size. Because of this, I didn't customize my own DBS. I guess I have been living on borrowed time.


How much of a forward and backward surge are we talking about here? Are these proven phenomenons or just mere speculations?


Where do you recommend i sew additional settings from the current one? I'm thinking of 2 additional ones. one is 3 inches below, and the other is 5 inches below the factory installed one. What do you think?

I'm so pissed!

favaks

Deep Brake Settings need to be customized for every jumper. The brake setting for a particular canopy needs to be adjusted based on the suspended weight. (Minor differrences in CG can also have some effect on brake settings).

It is impossible to set a standard brake setting based solely on canopy size.

BR sets the brakes on their canopies based on their "ideal" wingloading. In general, I've found that the single brake setting (the shallow setting) that they ship canopies with is set for slider down openings with a wingloading around .7. Obviously, if you use this brake setting with a higher wingloading, you will see opening surge. If you use it with a lower wingloading, you can experience deployment stall (and opening backsurge with a vented canopy).


That totally depends on where the brakes are set. My experience has been that my best setting for an unvented canopy creates a backsurge of approximately one half canopy length when used for a vented canopy.


Proven phenomenon. I have very good video of backsurge on both a Blackjack and a Vtec FOX.


I started out by setting mine at plus and minus 3 and 6 inches (so, five total settings) from the factory settings. It's probably not necessary to put the lighter settings in, but I'd try setting them about at three inch intervals.

Are you familiar with the effects of tail (and head) winds on deployment stall? It can become important with deeply set brakes, mostly if you are doing low, wind-through objects with a tailwind.

A few other places to look for information on DBS:

Brake Settings thread from BLiNC Technical Archives. In particular look at the comment from Adam Filipino which includes the following:


Another comment from Adam is in this thread.

Customizing your own DBS is mandatory for slider down BASE.

I weight 140 naked. My exit weight is about 170. I own a Fox VTEC 245, so I'm loading it at .7. Since this is the "ideal" wingloading according to BR, should I attempt to customize it further? Maybe this is a question for BR. Still, is this the "ideal" brake setting for slider up or off? I guess the best way to find out is try it out myself.

The ultimate question is, with VTEC, is there a way to set the brakes so that there is minimal or no back surge, relative to non-VTEC. If there is none, then the penalty for jumping VTEC is with very deep brake setting, you'll get a back surge, and with shallow settings, you get a forward surge. The best one can do is compromise? All of a sudden VTEC just doesn't sound very appealing anymore.

I'm not very familiar with the effect of tail/head wind. I only jump when there is little or no wind, so far.

Thanks,
favaks

That's not the ideal wingloading according to BR. It's my personal feel for the brake settings on the BR canopies I have experience with.

You should always customize the brake settings on any BASE canopy. It is particularly important for slider down non-span jumps (where you will have less separation from the object).


The "new" standard brake setting on Vtec FOXes is identical to the "old" shallow setting on standard FOXes. BR used to recommend using this brake setting for slider up, and a deeper one (factory set 4 inches deeper on all FOXes, regardless of size) for slider down. Now, they recommend using the "old" shallower setting for all jumps. You're going to have to draw your own conclusions.


OK, that probably ought to be a different thread. This one has already diverged from canopies to deep brake settings, which is more than enough topics for one thread (maybe I'll try to split this up). If I find the time, I'll try to start it. If not, feel free to start a "what is the effect of winds on openings" thread yourself.

I believe this is the achilles heel of vented canopies. I also think that several people know this, and aren't saying anything about it. Their reasons for not discussing it are their own--I understand that one of them "refuses to discuss the research of this shop with our customers."

Don't get me wrong, I do think that secondary inlets are a major advance in BASE technology. I just don't think that they are the magic solution that so many people seem to think they are (and that they are sometimes marketed as). There is a lot of work that still needs to be done here, and saying that we've solved all the problems seems counterproductive.

Yes, ok, wow. Lots of different items popping up in this thread, most of which I'm really not qualified to comment on. Of course, that won't stop me from commenting. . .

1. Backsurge: while Tom states that this a proven phenomenon based on video analysis (and I'm sure if he says he's seen it, then he has), I think the magnitude of the movement here is trivial. According to Tom, he's seeing around 1/2 a canopy depth movement which he attributes to bottomskin venting. Again, assuming this is accurate, this is trivial.

There are very few jumpers who have ever opened so close to an object that a "backsurge" of approximately four feet would have resulted in an object strike and/or injury with an on-heading opening. Tom is one; I'm another, as are some of my jumping mates.

Seriously, though, we really shouldn't be opening so close to an object that 4 feet of backwards movement is substantive. Too, even an incredibly small wind can cause a canopy to move four feet in any given direction on opening, no problem.

Net net, no jumper has ever been injured or killed due to "backsurge." It may be an interesting technical phenomenon, but I don't see it as being relevant to actual gear choices. DW, who first posited the existence of backsurge (and who first explored the ideas of bottomskin venting in BASE) and I discussed this, and he concurs.


2. The moniker of "Deep Brake Settings" (DBS) is a misnomer. No brake setting is inherently "deep" or "shallow;" just because a canopy has two different brake settings on it's lines does NOT make one "deep" and one "shallow," save (trivially) in reference to each other.

It is quite common to see jumpers using their deeper (which I prefer to "deep" since both may in fact be too shallow) brake setting on slider down jumps and their shallower setting on slider up. However, it is equally common to see that BOTH the deeper and the shallower settings are way, way too shallow for safe use with hard objects behind a jumper. Being too shallow, remember, simply means that on opening the canopy is moving forward with some speed, versus sinking straight down.

There's good video of a jumper in Malaysia suffering the consequences of too-shallow brake settings on a legal building jump. With helmet cam footage, the sound of him repeatedly impacting the building while his canopy surges forward into it is. . . sobering. Too-shallow brakes can kill you.

Conversely, if a canopy ships with one brake setting only, this setting is neither "deep" or "shallow." It just. . . is (kinda Zen-like). It might be too deep (unlikely with most gear manfacturers), or too shallow for safe jumping. In any case, it likely needs to be customized for a given jumper.

Tom's advice both on why to customize brakes and HOW to customize brakes is terribly important. BASE jumpers today die from object strike, for the most part. Too-shallow brake settings are a major - if not the major - cause of object strike injuries or fatalities (this is my opinion, but even if it isn't the #1 reason, bad brake settings always make a bad situation even worse).

Tom is also right that I'm skewed by my locale, perhaps. In Portland, we jump lots of low and often underhung objects, and have been known to do this with "non-optimal" winds. Consequently, we take proper brake settings as a given; I've been jumping a new canopy with brakes too shallow for a few months now on and off, and every jump I am aware of the impact this oversight will have and plan accordingly. To simply not know that improper brake settings are a huge issue is hard for me to understand, but I think it is more common than I imagine given my Portland-jumping roots.


3. In terms of venting for new jumpers, I think Tom and I have as much a difference in perspective as we have a difference of opinion. Again, in my home area there simply aren't any "safe" objects for beginners. So my concept of "beginning" BASE is skewed, certainly. However, in other places in the world I guess folks can flop off easy stuff for years during their BASE career and wouldn't ever really need venting.

Frankly, I'd say this however: if a beginning jumper is poor enough with BASE canopy management that bottom-skin venting is a "complexity" that is hard for them to manage, they aren't anywhere near good enough to be jumping "real" BASE objects. Now that I'm sliding into "Pacific NW BASE snobbery," I'll just stop typing before I get any deeper. . .


4. Landing with one rear riser and one toggle is not too bad. I've done it three times slider down, due to blown brake lines. Never done it slider up, so I can't comment on that. I learned to do it after I blew a brake line jumping in South Africa - a 500 foot to impact cliff with a 2000+ foot canopy flight to landing. So I had lots of time to play with the riser/toggle "flare" before setting up for landing. Once I'd found the sweet spot, I got a MUCH better flare than both rear risers - important on that jump as I was landing on pavement with a slight tailwind.

I'm not sure toggle/riser is "better" than riser/riser, but once I learned both I was able to get a better landing with the toggle/riser setup. Not sure why, maybe that only applies to fat-assed, horny Dogs.


5. Final metaphor (or is it a simile?): vented canopies are cars with anti-lock brakes, unvented are without. Non-ABS is "less complex" and "simpler," but one wouldn't recommend that a new driver avoid the "complexity" of ABS, right? Vented canopies behave like unvented ones, but with a bigger envelope of responsiveness and more options for off-heading correction.


6. I'd much rather see a student of mine have "backsurge" of a few feet on opening with a vented canopy than a snivelly, jellyfish opening on an unvented one (brake settings held constant for both). Why? Simple: jellyfish openings are much more likely to evolve into full-on off-headings; a bit of backstall isn't going to cause anything worse than a strange visual from above, and the need to pop the toggles off quick to get the canopy flying forward.

In general, I look at every tech element mostly in terms of how it will affect off-heading percentages, and how it will help or hinder the correction of off-headings after the fact. This is, again, because the majority of jumpers have died from off-heading openings, plain and simple. They are the true "black death" element of BASE, and the more we plan for and understand them, the longer we'll live.

From another angle, we can control almost all other BASE risk factors - but not off-headings. We can minimize them, but we don't fully understand them and they happen to ALL jumpers sooner or later. They are the one great "Russian roulette" element of BASE - many of us have done jumps where an off-heading would have been fatal, no question. <cough>Aiguille du Midi in 20+ mph winds<cough>


7. Tom knows more about BASE than I do, so listen to him and not me! I'm just a fat-assed BASE canine from the land of dodgy objects and rainy weather


Good thread, Tom. I hope folks appreciate the time and energy (and knowledge) you are investing here. What's up, too sunburned down there to get out and jump?

Peace and happy holidays,

D-d0g
ddog@wrinko.com
www.wrinko.com

ps: "I am sorry, that is not possible."
Tom: "but we're FLYYYYYYYING down. . . (flaps arms to demonstrate)
Dog: "I have a Norwegian friend. . . "
Dog: "That jump is only safe if you pull the slider down. . . "

I'm pretty sure this is not correct. I believe there was a wall strike resulting in injury due to canopy backsurge during inflation. If memory serves, it happened in the pre-BASE canopy days, on an old skydiving canopy. While that may have no bearing on the vented/unvented discussion, it does illustrate that backsurge can be a dangerous phenomenon, and has injured jumpers in the past.

I'll dig around and try to locate more details on the incident.

This has nothing to do with this discussion... I would just like to say I learned a crap load on this thread alone and it also brought up technicalities I never would have thought of.. Though I do not BASE jump right now It is still very educational to us newbs.. I would like to thank Tom and others for taking there personal time to discuss these matters. Cheers c-ya at an exit point sometime Ryan

This BASE canopies discussion took place in 2002.
How would sound the debate in 2007?
I feel the Ace and Blackjack are now the most popular canopies (US), together with the Troll (Europe).
Am I right? If yes, what are the main reasons?

Olivier

would of been good if I read that haha

id love for this thread to re-start. i also learned a shot ton of great info and used it when selecting my second base canopy. anyone want to give their review on the blackjack and troll?
start this sucker up again!
thnx

I'm a know nothing novice with less than 80 jumps. I jump a BJ280 at 0.7. It opens on heading with little if any pressure wave. Heaps of forward speed and can stop and sink straight down the chimney. It has an excellent flare capacity. I want for nothing more.

John

Tom, with time, about 5 years now, did your recommendations for inexperienced jumpers changed. Did you start telling them to get vents/valves on their first canopy or are your still sticking to the no vents/valves for bigginners. (if money isn't an objection)

agreed. buying anything other than the BJ is stupid!

and i never understood why people told their students to not get a vented canopy, it just makes so much sense.

What about using a BJ for terminal jumps? Will there be an increase in opening force due to the vents and will there be any danger of damage to equipment or injury because of this. Ive never done a terminal jump on a BJ but it seems like a lot of people have a BJ in one right and and ACE in the other for higher objects.

None I've noticed. Bottom skin expansion is what slams you. Vents help minimize the time between bottom skin expansion and canopy inflation/pressurization.

I now jump a Black Jack exclusively for all delays. My opinion about the Black Jack is very high. It pressurizes quickly, it's responsive and has a lot of range from really slow to moderately fast. There's a catch to fast pressurizing responsive canopies though. Brand new canopy pilots tend to over control when flying and under react right at opening. A fast pressurizing and responsive canopy requires immediate and fairly precise control input.

I still recommend vented for new jumpers. Just choose reasonable objects to jump off while honing your initial canopy skills.

Good luck.

I jump a TrollDW MDV and a Flik VTEC. are you calling me stupid.

No, he said buying anything other than a blow job is stupid. Personally I think buying a blow job is stupid but it doesn't bother me.

um. no. im calling you inexperienced.

No, at least not for that anyway, I'm calling your ass cheap for not shelling out the extra $500

My BlackJack CUS arrives September 28th...will advise...

..Mmuuuuuthufuckuuz.

I have been discussing some special fabric considerations with John LeBlanc from PD, to build a "stealth" BlackJack.

Although, this probably won't happen till the end of the year.

There is nothing that can compete with a Composite Upper Skin BlackJack...

Nothing...

well, maybe a super-modified vented ACE

...in an ugly scraped together container called a jester.

Try convincing Douggs of that.

Also, Apex is now offering a ZP foreskin (1st 1/3) on the Flik as an option, not to be confused with a full ZP topskin. They have said they may offer it on other canopies.

Yeah what about the troll, Tom, you said you had have bad openings on it, but its the most popular capony in europe, there most of been some changes on it since your review.

But hey, where is Tom A?

"Deathcamping" this week. I'm gonna go back down in a little while and check it out.

Article here:

Just finished teaching for 11 days straight. Trying to catch up now...