Parachuting for Charity: A 5-year audit (1999)

Re:Parachuting for Charity: A 5-year audit (1999) by digikazi on Thursday January 16, 2020 @01:01PM (#22067086)

I'll bite. Assuming those charity parachutists were doing solo jumps using the static line system, it makes sense. The static line exit isn't dangerous per se, but the landing can be... challenging. For example, the old style round parachute couldn't be slowed down on landing, it had a constant rate of descent. On landing,you had to hit the ground and do a PLF [1].

The square canopy (or the ram-air canopy) can indeed be slowed down. It's also a lot more manoeuvrable, and can go quite fast. A novice might not be able to correctly judge the speed/altitude/wind direction - and if not handled properly, a square canopy can land you on your face or break a leg.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parachute_landing_fall

EDIT: spelling and added a link

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Parachuting for Charity: A 5-year audit (1999) by perl4ever on Friday January 17, 2020 @09:54PM (#22081906)

"For example, the old style round parachute couldn't be slowed down on landing"

In the late 90s, wouldn't they have been using the ones that you can fly like a wing? And I don't know how widespread it was, but possibly a radio to give you instructions, when to flare.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Parachuting for Charity: A 5-year audit (1999) by CorvusCrypto on Thursday January 16, 2020 @05:39PM (#22069799)

Mostly inexperience/doing this with first timers played the major role

> The number of regular jumps by experienced enthusiasts done during this period is estimated at 50,000, giving an incidence of injury for regular parachutists of 0.02% – reflecting better expertise and training

[ Parent | on HN ]