Re: [DaveO] BlackJack v. FLiK
In reply to:
What are the benefits of the vents on delays over 7 sec.
I don't really see a whole lot of benefit
to openings. As long as you have adequate separation, and don't have any cigars in the cellar, I wouldn't bother.
In reply to:
I take it everybody gets slammed with the vented canopies a terminal?
Yep. That's pretty much been my experience.
However,
I think that the bottom skin inlet issue is radically oversimplified in many people's minds. The problem is especially relevant in this case. Here's the key point:
Bottom skin inlets do not have identical effects on all canopies. The FOX has difficulties in steeply braked approaches, related to it's shallow angle of attack. For this reason, secondary inlets greatly improve the flight performance of the Vtec FOX in deep brakes. The secondary inlets allow air inflow through the bottom skin, maintaining the canopy's internal pressurization even in brakes deep enough to stall a standard FOX.
The Mojo, on the other hand, has a relatively wider performance envelope. In very deep brakes, it tends to maintain pressurization far better than the FOX. I suspect that the effects of secondary inlets on the Mojo's flight profile would be far less pronounced than the effect on the FOX.
The Ace has an an even wider flight envelope--and the effects of the secondary inlets are definitely less than they are on the FOX. In deep brake approaches, it's very difficult to tell the difference between the (unvented) Ace and the (vented) Blackjack.
The Troll also has a very wide flight envelope, so I would suspect that the effect of the MDV's, while probably quite dramatic on opening, are relatively limited (as with the Ace/Blackjack) in flight.
I don't know how this relates to the Flik. I suspect that it's flight profile is very similar to that of the FOX, since the airfoil is identical. However, the trim is different, as is the aspect ratio, so no one really knows for certain. I am uncertain whether BR actually built any non-Vtec Fliks for testing. The Fliks I have seen in the possession of their test jumpers all had secondary inlets, so I rather suspect that the non-Vtec Flik saw minimal (if any) testing.
How does this all relate to your original query? Is it worth spending the money to get secondary inlets on a dedicated terminal canopy?
I think the answer depends on (a) what type of canopy you are using, and (b) what kind of landing area you have.
If you (a) are jumping a FOX (or maybe a Flik), and (b) have to sink in to tight landing areas, then the secondary inlets may be worth the extra money.
But if you don't have to hit small landing areas, then the extra money (and harder openings) are probably not worth it.
My personal preference in a "terminal only" canopy would be an unvented canopy with a wide flight envelope, and a good ability to sink. So, I'd either buy a Troll or an Ace. Since the Troll is cheaper than the Ace (by $100 in your size--and a total of $385 cheaper than that Vtec Flik), I'd probably go with the Troll. Remember, this is all for jumps on which opening characteristics are relatively irrelevant.
Wow, that was a pretty long, rambling post, on a topic that you probably didn't really want that much depth on.

Sorry.