The sport has come a long way from T-10 rounds and the Para-Commanders of yesteryear. It wasn't long after the development of the first ram-air parachute that high performance canopies were created. In 1988 Parachutes De France™ created one of the first high performance parachutes called the "Bluetrac".It was a one of a kind elliptical ram-air parachute constructed of the first zero-permeability fabric that promised a new type of performance. This paved the way for an extreme form of parachuting called “swooping” and the sport has never been the same.

The much needed closed nose configuration helped slow down the deployment process and control the openings on this new breed of parachutes. This paved the way for more variations of tri-cell parachutes and in 1996 swoopers started organizing swoop competitions down mountains (called Bladerunning™) and on ponds (called pond swooping). Then in 2003 the Pro Swooping Tour™ presented the competition format to the International Parachuting Commission and the sport of “canopy piloting” was born. Swoop competitions push the evolution of parachutes as swoopers continue to search for the endless swoop.

In early 2000 the Icarus 46 project proved what many already knew, drag played a huge and significant role on smaller parachutes. During the VX46 project a 'direct deployment' method was used to remove the deployment bag, bridle and pilot chute which helped reduced drag and create a smoother flight. The positive effects of the direct deployment method on the VX46 lead to other developments. In 2001 Team Extreme experimented with using disposable deployment systems that were made of cheap material that after deployment simply floated away. This worked great for competition but it wasn’t very environmentally friendly.  Around that same time Ian Bobo from Performance Designs created the RDS™ (Removable Deployable System).

Over the past decade designers have experimented with things like ram-air stabilizers, 11 cell (33 chamber) airfoils, fully elliptical canopies, new line configurations and more. Pilots even used slightly longer lines (or longer risers) to help keep their canopies diving longer which added even more flight performance. Then sometime between 2002-2003 a group of competition pilots (factory pilots) started thinking 'differently' than everyone else.

In the past, swoopers increased the performance of their parachute by simply downsizing which increased their wing loading and reduced drag. But the new idea was to fly slightly larger wings and add more thrust by wearing more weight.  A radical new pattern emerged in canopy piloting and pilots started upsizing their parachutes while adding additional weight to reach their parachute's optimal wing loading. The positive results were immediate and obvious. 

Here is an example of how it works.

A swooper has two canopies that are exactly the same except one of them is a 60 sqft and the other is 90 sqft. The swooper is flying them both at the optimal wing loading of lets say 2.4 (optimal loading is different on most canopies) so both of these canopies have the same thrust potential. It then becomes a decision between which one is going to have more performance? The canopy with less surface area and less drag or the canopy with more surface area and more drag? Parachute wings, like the wings of an aircraft, are designed so air flows faster over the top than the bottom so as the "velocity" of air increases the pressure decreases and the wing produces ‘lift’ in the form of low pressure over the wing.

The 60 sqft canopy has just 60 sqft of surface area (lifting area) for low pressure over the wing and the 90 sqft canopy has 90 sqft of surface area over the wing. Parachutes with more surface area over the wing can carry more low pressure and thus more lift as long as they can generate the required thrust. The major drawback to the larger wing is the additional drag but in our scenario the drag of the 90 sqft wing doesn’t outweigh the advantages of all the additional lift. 

So if both canopies were flown the same way, at the same loading and in the same conditions the 90 sqft parachute could swoop further than the 60 sqft. Smaller parachutes may come in faster but they can decelerate fast too! The was never more obvious than with the  Icarus VX46 project and later with the VX39. These canopies were ballistic because they were flown at a very high wing loading and they had little drag. However, the wing couldn’t carry much low pressure (lift) over the wing so it would slow down fast during the swoop. Having a lot of speed is important but maintaining that speed is crucial for a long swoop. So as fate would have it the new trend emerged and pilots began upsizing while wearing weight to reach the podium. 

This trend peaked around the time of the 2nd World Cup of Canopy Piloting in 2004 where several crashes occurred from pilots who struggled to stay in the course while wearing too much weight. On lookers got to see pilots strapping on more and more weight between rounds trying to increase performance. It got so bad that some pilots needed assistance strapping on the extra weight and making it out to the loading area. Some competitors were wearing as much as 60-70lbs of additional weight! It quickly became a dangerous game to see who could wear the most weight and stay in the course. It set our sport back years.

Due to safety issues canopy piloting had to be course corrected with the introduction of weight control rules. This is just one example of how canopy pilots have tried to squeeze more performance out their canopies in the absence of something better. There has been no major updates to the modern cross braced canopy for almost two decades. The basic tri-cell structure that Performance Designs™ created in 1988 is still the dominate platform used today. It is the same tri-cell configuration used on every cross braced canopy today.

In 1995 New Zealand Aerosports™ created the "Mach 1 Extreme" which was a seven cell ZP elliptical cross braced canopy with the new closed nose configuration. In 1997 they created Icarus canopies and upgraded the Mach 1 to the 'FX Extreme". Then in 1999 Icarus canopies added a nine cell version to the line up called the "VX". In that same year Performance Designs™ came out with their own version called the "Velocity". Several years later Precision Aerodynamics moved into the market with versions called the "XAOS".  Then in 2004 New Zealand Aerosports™ created Daedalus canopies™ and released a new improved version of their nine cell called the "JVX". 

The JVX had a new trim, new nose design and no stabilizers.  Around the same time Daedalus canopies started creating parachutes specifically for ground launching using sail cloth. Sail cloth is thicker and more rigid material than ZP giving parachutes more 'memory' and rigidity than its ZP counterparts. Through testing it became apparent there were significant advantages to using sail cloth so the company began testing it on its JVX. The JVX made of sail material retained its shape better for longer periods of time and had less top skin distortion. Due to the canopy’s added rigidity it’s pilots could downsize without adding weight but still gain performance. Even though the JVX still uses the tri-cell structure it gives us a glimpse into what our future might look like if new technology was created to replace the current cell structure.

For parachute technology to make another big advancement like the one we made with tri-bracing there must be change in the market place. Significant time and money needs to be spent to create new technology that could replace the current cell structure used on high performance parachutes today.  Any new technology would need to make our wings more rigid than those using the tri-cell structure. New technology could allow pilots to move in a new direction and fly smaller, more rigid wings that could create less drag while boosting performance. This is exactly what happened in the hand gliding community. 

Previous Hang glider competitors used larger wings and wore extra ballast (weight) to increase their wing loading until that trend got replaced by new technology that allowed for smaller, more efficient gliders to dominate.  Advanced composites and other materials made better more rigid gliders that created less drag while added performance. These new technologies allowed Hang glider pilots to fly gliders that were 30-40sqft smaller than before. 

The evolution in high performance parachute design is driven by demand in the market. Unfortunately, canopy piloting is one of the smallest disciplines in the sport of skydiving. Even with canopy piloting’s recent popularity the market is still small. If there were as many swoopers as there are RW skydivers in the world we would no doubt be flying canopies we couldn’t imagine today. 

So how far have we come? 

1988-Parachutes De France™ releases the “Bluetrac” which was constructed of the first zero-permeability fabric which promised a new type of performance.

1988-Performance Designs™ releases the "Excalibur" which marked the birth of cross braced technology. The Excalibur was made of F111, non elliptical & had an open nose.

1993-Performance Designs™ releases the "Stiletto". One of the most popular non cross braced swooping canopies of all time.

1995-New Zealand Aerosports™ releases the "Mach 1 Extreme". The first seven cell high performance elliptical crossed braced canopy made of ZP utilizing a closed nose.

1997-New Zealand Aerosports™ forms Icarus canopies™ and releases the "FX Extreme".  A new improved seven cell elliptical tri-cell made of ZP with a closed nose.

1999-Icarus canopies™ releases the "VX Extreme". The first nine cell elliptical tri-cell made of ZP with a closed nose.

1999-Performance Designs™ releases the "Velocity". PDs first high performance seven cell elliptical cross braced canopy made of ZP with a closed nose.

2002-Precision Aerodynamics™ releases the "XAOS". Both seven & nine cell versions of an elliptical tri-cell made of ZP with a closed nose.

2002-Ian Bobo with Performance Designs™ creates the “RDS” (Removable Deployable System™).

2004-New Zealand Aerosports™ forms Daedalus canopies™ and releases the "JVX". An improved nine cell with new trim, new nose section, no stabilizers & sail material.

It took a while for cross braced canopies to catch on because they packed much larger, had radical openings and cost more. High performance parachutes have high performance openings and the new breed of parachutes had more performance then ever before. Just imagine your a skydiver in 1997 and your accustomed to packing a non cross braced parachute like a Stiletto and suddenly the next best thing at your DZ packs twice as large, its more ground hungry and has radical openings! 

Cross braced canopies were dismissed at first but before long they were swooping in at the DZ catching everyones attention. Some skydivers even had to purchase larger rigs to fit their new cross braced parachute. Eventually these canopies caught on as skydivers learned to pack these bulky canopies and deal with the wild openings. Fast forward a few decades and we could be facing some of the same challenges today. 

"Z Bracing" technology has been paraded as the next big thing but I am not completely convinced. Z bracing replaces the tri-cell structure by dividing each cell into five chambers instead of three. This means that Z braced canopies will pack even larger than their tri-cell counterparts. Z braced canopies will pack considerably larger even if they are built with a low pack volume material. I have been testing the so called “Z brace” technology for over five years now and unless the market can find a better solution we are looking at a future where canopy pilots will be wearing large CRW like rigs to hold our small but thick wings. 

Personally, if I were still competing today, I would want the most rigid wing possible regardless of the pack volume. With current technology and materials it would be a Z braced canopy (JSX) made of all sail material. I have an 83 Z braced canopy made of ZP and it packs like a 150+ conventional parachute. If this canopy was made with a thicker material (sail) it would most likely pack as big as 170 or 190! Hopefully new technology will emerge but I’m afraid it will still be bulky. Maybe its not that big of deal for most of us but it begs the question, what are swoopers really willing to deal with to advance the sport of canopy piloting?

It would take a considerable amount of time & money to come up with new designs to replace what we have today. Just consider for a moment how long the tri-cell structure was around before it was widely used? Just consider how long Z braced canopies have been teated (5+ years) already. Most of the advancements in high performance canopies have come from a friendly rivalry between parachute companies, factory teams and the pride of the designers themselves. Here are some examples.

PD created the tri-cell structure but it was New Zealand Aerosports™ that used the closed nose configuration to help the openings. PD made the decision to stay with a seven cell platform while New Zealand Aerosports™ (Icarus canopies) moved on to the nine cell platform. This has created the debate “which is better a seven cell or nine cell?” Whether its about pride or money when companies compete against each other consumers win and it helps our sport evolve. However, when one company dominates the market they are not motivated to innovate and push the evolution of the high performance parachute. 

This lack of motivation slows down new developments or worse it stops development all together. Just think about it, why would a company spend more time and money on R&D to create a replacement for an existing canopy if they are dominating the market by using another method? The short answer, they wouldn’t. The company would ride out the existing design as long as they could and squeeze every dime out of the market. To motivate innovation there needs to be something or someone to come along and challenge their position forcing them to respond.

A good example of this is the friendly rivalry between Performance Designs™ and Icarus canopies™. In 1997 Icarus canopies built the “FX Extreme” which was one of the first high performance cross braced canopies that used PD’s tri-cell technology. This no doubt motivated PD in developing the Velocity that was released in 1999. This in turn motivated Icarus canopies to release a new nine cell version the same year called the “VX”. Then in 2000 Icarus canopies created ‘Team Extreme’ to help promote and demonstrate the potential of the VX. 

Even though the VX and Velocity came out the same year Icarus had something that PD did not, a factory team. Similar to building a NASCAR team Icarus canopies hand selected the right guys at the right time and communicated with action instead of words. Team Extreme was nearly unstoppable while traveling the globe attending competition after competition. As a result many people bought the VX, which unlike today, created a field of competitors that was close to a 50/50 split between the VX and Velocity. 

You could not open a skydiving magazine anywhere in the world without reading about the adventures of Team Extreme. It was a powerful marketing tool that motivated Performance Designs™ to form their own marketing vehicle called the “Performance Designs Factory Team”. The newly formed team went to the company asking for a nine cell version of the Velocity to compete with the VX but PD refused. Instead, PD told the team to look at ways to get more performance out of their existing Velocity. The team tested many ideas and the Removable Deployable System™ (RDS) was one of the things that came out of it. Little did they know but Team Extreme would not be around the following season to challenge them.

As fate would have it Team Extreme's last season together (2003) was the PDFT's first. So they took nearly the same path as Team Extreme (except not as cool:) and traveled the globe competing as an unstoppable force. The point here is that Team Extreme motivated PD into creating their own team (which took three years) which pushed the limits of the ram-air parachute but now there is no driving force pushing PD. There have been a few other teams along the way but none have had the support or funding of Team Extreme and the PDFT. So what motivates innovation in our sport? 

If the PDFT is dominating the scene and this costs Performance Designs less than the R&D to create new parachute technology then what is motivating them to develop the next generation of high performance canopies? We should all hope that the sport of canopy piloting will continue to grow so the market becomes large enough that parachute companies will invest the time & money necessary to develop the next generation of parachutes. Otherwise there will need to be another company, another canopy design or another group of guys to come along and challenge the current “status quo”. So what are you waiting for?

 

Jim Slaton, D-24261, has been parachuting for more than 16 years and has logged more than 10,000 jumps. He made his first skydive out of UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter while serving as an Airborne Ranger with the US Army. He is the founding member of Team Extreme, a factory test pilot and the creator of the Pro Swooping Tour and much more.