Basejumper.com - archive

Worth it? Feel any difference?
Responses from people who paid full price for the PC please.

How is the PEAK performing?

I have a Snatch and I paid the full $ 195,00.
I normally jump vented, ZP, PCs now.
I did not expierience/notice PC osscilations. I am quite satisfied with the Adrenaline PCs that are the cheapest one, workmanship is good.
I have a few Asylum PCs- Toxic and regular. They are
more expensive (Toxic) than the Snatch. There I am jumping 34" with a 265 UL canopy.
Smaller PC easier to pull is my main advatage.

Matt told me to stick with the 36" PC. The Snatch does not have a higher Snatchforce.
Workmanship on the Snatch is comparable to Asylum - i. e. very high.
Before Adrenaline PC, I jumped the Apex PCs, more expensive than Adrenaline, but cheaper than Asylum.
I got one from Apex with an offset of 1 cm in the loading tapes, and one PC with more than 2 cm. According to Apex one cm is well within specs. 2 cm would be borderline, I could send this one back on get a replacement - that was the last time I ordered a PC from Apex.

Up to now I did not feel a difference whlie deploying - I have about 10 jumps with it.
The workmanship is excellent, I like the single attachment point. You still have to tape the handle.
If you jump Asylum PCs, the Snatch is a good alternative.

Any offsets on Squirrel or Asylum PCs?

I never had an offset on Adrenaline or Asylum PCs.

I've been waiting for someone to ask this very question. I am in the same boat as many others with no complaints of workmanship or oscillation from the Adrenalin fare. Best value for money in terms of durability and performance. I personally don't see the value in a $195 dollar PC, especially since the design is hardly groundbreaking.

I have a 34" snatch that I paid full price for.

performance
It works just like in the video. I've done everything from slick jumps off 1500' A's, to tracking suit jumps and even used it with my base canopy out of a plane while flying my aura. In any configuration it inflates and is perfectly stable every time.

construction
On par with asylum. Very little (less than .5 cm) differences in any of the load tapes. The handle feel very secure and light. The large hole mesh on the bottom feel a little thin compared to other PCs, so keep an eye on it for any snags or wear. Single point attachment is nice and well constructed. The shape of the design makes it kind of short and squatty when packed into a BOC (personal opinion)

I like it, but if I were to pay full price again, I'd buy the 42" for when you're opening next to the object.

I bought the 42'' snatch and unfortunately am not really a fan of it.I trust my 8 year old morpheus more.

Was that a 42" or 42NR ? What kind of delays and can you be more specific on why no like ?

Neither have I, and I have inspected _a lot_ of PC's, especially Asylum PC's.

I haven't seen any asymmetry in Squirrel PCs either, but I've seen far fewer of them.

I've seen asymmetric PCs (asymmetric enough that I wouldn't be willing to jump them from a solid object) from every other manufacturer.

For those who aren't sure what we're talking about, there's a video here.

It's the 42'' with ring vent and apex. I feel that I am getting a slightly longer delay after pitching.Plus the way the cap and apex vent are sewn, I find it harder to make a nice tight bulge.It's like the cap wants to float around on its own. The cap is also very thin compared to what I am used to and easily bent making the whole thing not feel so solid sticking out of the BOC.
I really don't want to sound negative about.I see the idea behind it and really like what Squirrel is doing for us and the sport. I still use it and have been trying different methods of packing it, but that's what I impression has been so far.Maybe there is to much venting for a 42''? I don't know?
So for me, right now, I only use it on larger objects where I am going to take a solid 3 seconds and I use my other vented 42'' morpheus for objects where i might only take 1 or 2 seconds. I have filmed it though and it does what they say.I won't knock that.

You should probably read their website and do one of two things. 1) order the correct gear for your stow-and-throw style of jumping, or 2) take a real delay.

The snatch works perfectly. It is the users that are sometimes delayed.

is a 3 second slider down not a real delay or am i missing something? also i never said it didn't work perfectly. i just gave my opinion of it in a thread where personal opinions were asked for.

Just bustin your balls. But seriously, you should probably exchange it for the model that better suits your jumps. The model without ring vents would be best for you, no?

Honestly, I never saw the sizing chart on the website when I was slightly drunk and stoked on buying new gear, but I have no intention in trying to exchange it. I will keep using it on certain objects.I had also never seen one before I got mine and was just interested in trying something different.I still would prefer a stiffer cap, but again that's just my opinion.Take it for what it is.

I have a 36 for ws and a 38 for my slider down stuff (my local stuff is 450' +.) Canopies are 250 ibex (UL) / 245 UL troll. I do have a 42NR coming with my outlaw but the 38 has been working just fine with the ultra lights and 2-4 second delays. Video and other people on the load confirm it inflates and pulls without oscillation. Also I'm not saying the 38 pulls harder than any other 38 (it doesnt) but its doing just fine with the UL's.

Also, since the snatch is open sourced, I showed it to Pete swan to see if him or his apprentice would wanna bust out a couple for the locals and he took a hard look at it and made a comment about how they get away for selling it for 195 is cuz it's made over seas. Quality is top notch.

So far I have only seen five or six in person.
All of them had been very well made.
Each worked as advertised.
Prompt Delivery times.

what happened to "this snatch needs more snatch"?

I definitely thought and said that --- ha ha ha
but after reviewing video, and some more thinking
decided it performed as designed, and I was using
a less than ideal size: 42 instead of a 46 or 48.

After comparing the size of their PCs versus other
manufacturers PCs I contacted Mattt and Will, who
explained that yes when laying flat they will appear
smaller diameter but the same amount of nylon is
used & when inflated the surface areas are equal.

You know how on the ground you pull on the bridle
to get the PC to catch air, I have done this with one
in each hand, running around in my front yard, and
found most PCs have a snap where drag peaks but
then varies, the Snatch there is not that peak snap
but the drag just stays consistent and stable.

Surface areas of what? The nylon used during production?

Yes, I think that is correct.

Per Will Kitto:

The total surface area (amount of flat ZP used in construction)
is actually exactly the same as a same-sized standard PC.

Well there's their first problem then... the shape of the thing is such that there is ZP whose job it is to stabilize the thing and adds nothing in terms of drag. Intuition tells me the area of the imaginary circle formed at the mesh-ZP contact point would be a better proxy for pilot chute drag, although they really should have gone to a wind tunnel and tested the drag of their PCs and standard ones to make sure they are equivalent.

As a thought experiment in what I mean - take a 42" PC and streamer its ZP. It'll still have the same surface area as a 42" PC, but will have no drag whatsoever.

that Will Kitto needs a haircut...damn hippy

Wow.

Fortunately, there was not much intuition used in the development of the Snatch. There was, however, wind tunnel testing, math, CAD design, and real world testing.

In addition to a thorough description of the product which appears to have been not widely read, photos of Snatch prototypes in a wind tunnel, attached to load cells, can be found on the product page. http://squirrel.ws/snatch

The measured pull force was found to be equivalent to or greater than the comparable pilot chutes that were tested.

Anyone who has watched rear-facing video of their Snatch in action, compared to rear-facing video of other pilot chutes, will see what the point of this product is. Any pilot chute that extracts a packjob will extract a packjob - if that's all a person wants, then that's all a person needs.

Matt, was there any testing of snatch force (as opposed to pull force) done in a wind tunnel? It seems like that would be more difficult to test. The difference would be much more pronounced right after inflation as opposed to during a constant flow of air.

Personally I think that the snatch is extremely innovative, and am really excited by what squirrel is doing here. When I look at video of other pilot chutes on deployment, frankly, they look like shit!

BUT I do have some concerns about the snatch, mostly because it's such a new design. It appears that the snatch does achieve its primary goal: increase stability and reduce PC oscillations. What I'm not yet confident in is that it will never hesitate or that snatch force might be reduced in some circumstances. Playing with it in my hand, it sometimes seems to "fold over" on itself and delay inflation. Some other jumpers have subjectively had the same feeling on deployment (in this thread even).

This is why I think Squirrel made a brilliant move by releasing the SkySnatch. Standard pilot chutes have been tested on literally millions of skydiving deployments. I would feel more confident with the snatch after it's gone through many more "test" deployments in the skydiving environment to work out any unforeseen bugs.

Those familiar with Reliability Engineering may know that products often follow a Bathtub Curve reflecting the chance of failure throughout their lifetime. Suffice to say, in the BASE environment, I'd rather not be on the steep initial part of that curve.

(I own a 42" snatch and just received my 30" skysnatch today)

Hmmm, wasn't that said about your rigs aswell, just before it failed?


Or about the inlets in your Tonysuit (at the time), which you knew had problems with inflation, but failed to share that with people cuz of marketing?

Results of both incidents weren't pretty and aftermath was preventable... But i guess marketing was more important.

I'm not saying you'll die with a snatch... i'm just saying i don't trust your testing :-)

Slovenian guy, there is a lot of gear on the market and a lot of talking on the internet. Perspective: I wouldn’t jump your national brand of wingsuit off a cliff because of things like this, http://m.epictv.com/...-flight-ep-3-/260482 and this, http://www.nbcnews.com/...-french-alps-n310886 and other simple facts like, can’t reach brakes… of course I’m not saying you’re going to die flying one, but it is my opinion to not trust them, either.

The harness incident of which you speak is well documented – the one jumper who damaged our gear also damaged his other brand harness, and other brand harnesses were damaged on other occasions. Other brand changed their design, we changed our design, and thankfully no one died! There have been much juicier gear problems in BASE jumping that one could point out, if one’s agenda would benefit from it.

I believe all manufacturers strive to create safe equipment. It is an ongoing process, and the market may eventually find ways to exploit unseen flaws in any design. The old adage that all BASE jumpers are test jumpers remains true, and people are right to be wary of new designs.

Beyond Slovenian guy’s apparent dislike for me and Squirrel, there are other reasons to not buy a Snatch. If your suspicion of the new is greater than your desire to benefit from something that could be better, then please stay away from the new stuff. We have done our best to explain what about it we think is better, and our testing has led us to believe that it is. Like everything we make, we developed the Snatch first and foremost for ourselves to use, and we use it every day skydiving and BASE jumping.

Classic basejumper.com post. And another reason I don't buy Phoenix Fly.

Holy speed wobbles - better tighten those trucks... Anybody know who that was in the red suit? (http://www.nbcnews.com/...-french-alps-n310886)

Chin up Green Machine decided it performed as designed

Back to the OP. Just my opinion.

Ive been close with both asylum and squirrel folk for, at least in base terms, a long time.

I think that both the toxic and the snatch are definitely superior designs in many ways to normal AV pilot chutes. If you are in need of new pilot chutes, they are great, and if you have the money, I doubt you will ever find anything wrong with them throughout their normal life.

I have done what I would consider to be quite a few jumps over the last 9 years, pretty evenly spaced out from dirty low, to some of the biggest jumps out there. I have never had an issue with any of my pilot chutes.

Just because a new design is better, doesnt mean an old design is bad. Toxics and snatches are fantastic, but if you have pilot chutes that work already, you should feel that you HAVE to get one of these or youre going to die. That being said, please feel free to send me any pilot chutes you feel may be obsolete so I can continue to expand my collection.

That's interesting. Do you think it's related to the ring venting?
Is it possible the snatch force is being dissipated in compressed air through the vents?

Where do we find this document? The discussion was removed from Incidents and the sticky discussion was removed from General forum.
Why would an incident such as this be removed?

The standard PC (made of a flat disc of fabric) have a stable 2D shape, but an unstable 3D shape. When inflating such a PC, the fabric takes that donut shape by wrinkling around the center and on the outside edge. The mechanical stress varies all over the surface and the wrinkles tend to somehow compensate that but it introduces a random parameter in the shape definition of the PC. The fabric being highly elastic and tolerating big bias deformation, when the load (speed) increases,the fabric will also deform where the stress is the highest, changing the shape of the PC (and drag). Such a system can enter into oscillating configuration, as we can see on PC that are "breathing".

The Snatch has a stable 3D shape (when inflated) but an unstable 2D shape (you cannot really keep all panels flat on the floor with an even tension on the fabric, it wrinkles). So when inflated, the tension in the materials is evenly distributed, the structure is in a configuration offering it's maximum stability, and the drag is function of the speed only, without the chaotic parameter of flat PCs.

Service bulletins are linked at the bottom of this page:
http://squirrel.ws/stronglite/inlay-bridge

Original thread is here :
http://www.basejumper.com/...rum.cgi?post=2975987

The mods probably keep only the urgent or non-resolved cases sticky

It wasn't removed. It was just un-stickied. I did that, and I did it without any input from or consultation with anyone at Squirrel.

Not too sure where you see innovation here? I believe toroidal chutes date way back into the 40s. Squirrel even mentions this on their site. Creative re-purposing maybe.
Just as the design is not a new one the lower initial snatch force people are noticing also isn't a new problem. The pros and cons of "3D", "Pie Slice", "Toroidal", "Ballute", and what ever else is the coolest name of the time designs have been debated for decades. So too has the fabric vs mesh ratio.
Disclaimer: So Matt doesn't get his panties in a bunch. I'm speaking about all parachutes, drogue chutes, cargo chutes, pilot chutes and any other round canopies used as drag devices for one purpose or another.

I wasn't saying squirrel invented round parachutes... I'm saying that applying those same ideas to pilot chutes IS new and innovative (at least to my knowledge).

Furthermore, the motivations and scale are very different: I'm pretty sure no one was concerned about object strike due to oscillation of their round, military issue parachute. BASE jumpers care deeply.

Totally new application of some very old ideas.

Well then your knowledge sucks ass. Skydives get made everyday with equipment that incorporates these ideas into their deployment systems.

Motivation is still the same and the scale is irrelevant. Again, PCs have been used in skydiving that incorporate similar theory.

Actually you couldn't be more wrong. The stability of the PC or Canopy or Drag Device becomes much more important as airspeed increases. As in greater airspeeds than BASE jumpers will ever achieve.

You should see this new invention of mine. I've been calling it the wheel.
But my post wasn't really trying to pick on you or the Snatch either. Just pointing out that this design is not new and that all the posts in this thread about the lower snatch of the PC is a well known aspect of these designs. Unfortunately there is a bunch of people who have no fucking clue and see everything as "new" and "innovative" and so we end up with threads discussing the pros and cons of shit they figured out decades ago. What next? Maybe we can all start discussing floating pin bridles again.

Well okay all PC's are donuts with differences that's true. But it's like saying all parachutes are drag generating devices with differences.

Yet when someone comes in and ask for the differences between a Fox and a Feather, we can either get pissed off and tell them to learn the whole boring story of the evolution of parachutes over the last century (which they won't do), either give them an answer and share the knowledge.

I think the discussion is always relevant from the moment we are facing the choice between two different standard products offered on the market by major manufacturers.
(by opposition to custom orders made only by people knowing exactly what they want to their rigger)

The other aspect is that while we can theorize the ideal donut-shape's drag and approximate what we're going to get at a given speed by an equation, we won't be able to deduce any behavior variation between two different kind of donuts in a similar environment.

In the same way, projecting the high speed results of what has been made in skydiving to the expected low speed reaction of a new product built differently would be taking a shortcut. The best way to figure out being to test, or to ask as many people as possible who actually tested the products.

Anyways, we all know that only the color matters in the end

You're always right, ever notice that?

Another thing, your communication skills suck ass. Try incorporating some old techniques in to your old skills... Or lack thereof.

Yeah why bother learning anything when someone else can just supply the answer.

I have noticed how a lot of people on here don't know fuck all, and that I can't help pointing it out.

True. Mostly because I'm a cunt with no patience.

Maybe instead of being such a cunt, you could enlighten us all with your breadth of knowledge? People come here to learn, you learned somewhere, other people no doubt helped you learn along the way. Someone wrote the books, and did the work to gain the knowledge you have. You asked questions. Instead of being such a dick, and taking your insecurity out on people less knowledgeable than you, you could help people learn and pass on what you have gained from others.

I agree, the Snatch is not new technology. Other manufacturers have used aspects of this design. Have any others used a true annular design with pilot chutes before? Not that I am aware of.

Annular, the name for donut shaped rounds have been used for paraglider and hang glider reserves for a long time because of the stability, consistent drag and inflation.

To be fair (claims of insecurity aside) I did try that in my first post, and reasonably politely too. It was only when Platypii insisted that 3D PCs are new and wondrous that I called him an idiot.

Without research I couldn't answer that with confidence. I wouldn't be surprised though as many 3D shapes have been utilized and millions of jumps have been done on ring vented drogues.

Which is the most obvious reason Squirrel went down this path.

I hope that was not an apparent jab at Squirrel for using paragliding technology to benefit the stagnant parachuting designs.

I was actually referring to their obvious gliding influences. But if you prefer a witch hunt then have at it.

mini-interrgation I regret. Squirrel had a huge head start in innovation from building from the ground up. The wing suit was a game-changer and Squirrel did not invent that. They have, however, populated the market with an average or better container, average or (most likely) better pilot chutes, high quality (on par or above the leading manufacturers) wing suits and now canopies. All this by working very fast and bridgning the gaps in PG and parachute technologies including developing equipment that has never been available to parachutists before. It's ok to say the company is as good as or better in all of it's products and services throughout the market, but to say they did not test their gear enough, etc is incorrect