Differences between parachutes and paragliders
Bob Maccione
hi, i'm a paraglider pilot who has never jumped out of a plane in my life.
however i have a friend who wants to get into para-gliding and she noticed
that parachutes are _much_ less expensive than paragliders. the paraglider
i just purchased cost me ~3000 ( with the harness ) and she has a parachute
catalog that has parachutes for ~ $1000 ( if memory serves me right ). i
tried to explain that they aren't the same and am wondering if anyone out
there in netland knows the difference between the two craft. off the top
of my head i know that a paraglider won't survive opening shock ( excuse
the non-correct wording ) and isn't as porus as a parachute.
any other comments about the differences?
thanks
bob maccione
Dale Southard
Well, sometimes there isn't much of a difference. Some of the primary parachute
manufactures have sold slightly modified versions of their parachutes as
paragliders (Glide Path for one). The trim is also changed slightly to allow
for more efficient gliding. Most paragliders have a larger aspect ratio than
comaparble parachutes. Many also have substantially different cell design, as
inflation is not a critical event (ie some designs use a cell with a much
smaller opening for air to come in, allowing a much more efficient airfoil
cross-section). The two are systems are not all that different. In fact I have
gone slope soaring with my maverick -- you need a steep hill and a good set of
kneepads.
--> --> Dale UVa (ds...@virginia.edu)
Gregory Galperin
Paragliders originated in mountaineering/climbing as an easy way of
descending from a lengthy climb (and in more than a few cases they saved at
least some fingers and toes when conditions turned sour). Climbers rigged
7-cell ram-airs up to their harnesses and took a quick (and fun!) trip down;
just like in skydiving, the main goal then was to get back down to the ground.
But since they hadn't just been in freefall for a mile ( ;-), a couple
of minutes under canopy on the way down didn't provide enough excitement. So
they started using larger and larger canopies, with more and more cells...
all the time looking enviously at hang glider pilots above them. The designs
grew in wingspan and area continually, and many paragliders are now over
40 ft. in wingspan and 450 sq. ft. in area, with a large aspect ratio. The
resulting airfoil is something like a ram-air sailplane (i.e., parachute +
glider = ...), and flies something like a hang glider (or so I've been told,
at least). The chord length tapers off severely at the ends, and the last
few cells are closed in front (they have no ram-air port, only cross-ports),
and curve down like stabilizers.
It's true that the materials used in paragliders are generally less
porous than those in skydiving canopies (although it's hard to get less
porous than a zero-porosity fabric... :), but a greater difference is that
paraglider materials are less elastic (which is why an opening shock from
terminal would shred them). Even standard parachute line cord has too much
stretch for paragliders (I know someone who injured himself when he rigged
his 'glider up with standard jacketed suspension line and couldn't control
it enough to keep from stalling out).
These canopies allow a much greater glide ratio than parachutes, and
allow (good) pilots to stay in the air for hours. Anyone who's been hanging
in a harness for over 15 mins. can understand why paragliders grew seats as
they became larger; multiple line groups are connected to the seat along its
length so that shifts in weight can steer the paraglider. To stay flying,
'glider pilots catch thermals (and carry variometers to help find them).
'Glider competitions sprang up, and have categories much like glider
(sailplane) competitions: net distance, time around a course, etc.
In summary, you can still buy small (<5 lbs!) 7- or 9- cell
paragliders to use for descents (and this is standard equipment for climbing
in Europe), or you can go the competition 'glider route. They're probably
more expensive than "normal" 'chutes because (1) they're larger, (2) the
designs are more complicated (tons o' cells, tons o' lines, and a more
involved airfoil design), and (3) the market is still relatively small.
Have I rambled long enough yet?-------+
!
+------=> Greg Galperin
galp...@husc9.harvard.edu
Harvard Mountaineering Club
Mass. Sport Parachute Club
ken_scofield
Message-ID: <1991May1....@husc3.harvard.edu>
> Paragliders originated in mountaineering/climbing as an easy way of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Your note was very informative and entertaining, but I wonder about the
above statement. While I have no doubt that climbers may have contributed
to the development of paragliders, I doubt they originated the concept.
I've been skydiving for nearly 20 years, and witnessed the introduction
of ramair canopies shortly after I started jumping. Seems like it wasn't
too much later that I was hearing about weather-grounded jumpers "slope-
soaring" off nearby hills on cloudy and/or windy days with their ramair
canopies. Granted, it took alot of wind and/or a steep slope to get
early ramairs airborne, but it could be done. In my mind, this was the
beginnings of 'paragliding'. I have no idea who was the first person to
actually modify a ramair in some way to make it a better 'paraglider',
but I'll bet it was a bored, ground-bound skydiver... (who may also have
been a climber with a 'great idea').
This is not intended as a flame, so please don't take it as such. Just
my personnal observations and speculations...
Ken Scofield C-9355 SSI #453890085
^ Hewlett-Packard, ICO Phone: (503)750-2426
|----/-\----| 1020 NE Circle Blvd. (k...@hpcvia.CV.HP.COM)
| Gone | Corvallis, OR 97330 (ucbvax!hplabs!hp-pcd!kas)
| Divin' or |
| Jumpin' | Cute Disclaimer: Nobody ever listened to me before,
|-----------| so why start now?
kl...@otago.ac.nz
> But since they hadn't just been in freefall for a mile ( ;-), a couple
> of minutes under canopy on the way down didn't provide enough excitement. So
> they started using larger and larger canopies, with more and more cells...
> all the time looking enviously at hang glider pilots above them. The designs
> grew in wingspan and area continually, and many paragliders are now over
> 40 ft. in wingspan and 450 sq. ft. in area, with a large aspect ratio. The
Aspect ratios of around 4:1 are now common
> resulting airfoil is something like a ram-air sailplane (i.e., parachute +
> glider = ...), and flies something like a hang glider (or so I've been told,
> at least). The chord length tapers off severely at the ends, and the last
> few cells are closed in front (they have no ram-air port, only cross-ports),
> and curve down like stabilizers.
Some also have winglet fins above the top surface. Some are ported only on
the wing undersurface, not leading edge (= less drag)
> It's true that the materials used in paragliders are generally less
> porous than those in skydiving canopies (although it's hard to get less
> porous than a zero-porosity fabric... :), but a greater difference is that
> paraglider materials are less elastic (which is why an opening shock from
> terminal would shred them).
Has anyone actually tested this? Also I believe that a paraglider would
need a drogue to open...
> Even standard parachute line cord has too much
> stretch for paragliders (I know someone who injured himself when he rigged
> his 'glider up with standard jacketed suspension line and couldn't control
> it enough to keep from stalling out).
Good Paragliders use kevlar shrouds
> These canopies allow a much greater glide ratio than parachutes, and
> allow (good) pilots to stay in the air for hours. Anyone who's been hanging
> in a harness for over 15 mins. can understand why paragliders grew seats as
> they became larger; multiple line groups are connected to the seat along its
> length so that shifts in weight can steer the paraglider.
That depends on the harness, most control still comes from the brake lines
attached to the trailing edge.
> To stay flying,
> 'glider pilots catch thermals (and carry variometers to help find them).
Or catch ridge lift on slopes facing into a wind. You need about a 25 kmh
breeze to stay up. Mostly canopies have max speed approx 40kmh
> 'Glider competitions sprang up, and have categories much like glider
> (sailplane) competitions: net distance, time around a course, etc.
> In summary, you can still buy small (<5 lbs!) 7- or 9- cell
> paragliders to use for descents (and this is standard equipment for climbing
> in Europe), or you can go the competition 'glider route. They're probably
> more expensive than "normal" 'chutes because (1) they're larger, (2) the
> designs are more complicated (tons o' cells, tons o' lines, and a more
> involved airfoil design), and (3) the market is still relatively small.
I dont know what a parachute costs, but I can get a glider ready to fly
for around $2500 new, $2000 second hand.
just my $0.02 worth
KLox
SKYDIVE
Fido-To: uiucuxc!otago.ac.nz!klox
> I dont know what a parachute costs, but I can get a glider ready
> to fly
> for around $2500 new, $2000 second hand.
What about classes? Licensing? What kind of limitations are there on where you can fly? Where can one find more information on the subject (Is there a USParagliderAssociation)?
--- Telegard v2.5i Standard
--- eecp 1.45 LM2
* Origin: Dream Park BBS Walnut Creek, CA 415-945-7799 (1:161/206.0)
--
SKYDIVE - via FidoNet node 1:233/13 (ehsnet.fidonet.org)
Henrik Klagges
1. There is a US paraglider association. You get member forms at every
hanglider location. A small fee + insurance is required.
2. Paragliders are in different performance regions:
- Glide finess in best serial chute (UP Flash): 7.76 (!)
- minimum sinking 1.3 m/s
- maximum speed 48 km/h
3. They really differ in the design:
- Aspect ratio of the (usually elliptic) wing up to 5.3 (ITV Saphir)
- many individual chambers, frequently > 30, sometimes > 50
- performance chutes are long-liners (6m)
- optional 'wing-tilt'- steering, i.e. aerodynamic steering without
brake lines possible (very smooth)
4. Dangerous flight conditions usually not reached by chutes, but by gliders:
- Full stall
- partial emptying of chambers
- 'Sackflug' (can't translate 8(), which is rapid descending without la-
minar air flow, but with open chute
You can avoid 4. by carefully selecting a non-super-hoopey glider and the
right weather conditions. Nevertheless, I always have an emergency parachute
with me (in case of collisions, material failure, etc.).
With modern gear, you can stay in the air for hours and even cover reasonable
distances (record 150km). The hardliners do fullstall-free fall-opening for
fun ...
Yours, Henrik Klagges
U of Munich
kl...@otago.ac.nz
"Sackflug" is usually referred to as a "Steady State Stall" or "Parachute
Stall" in English
KLox
Brent Callaghan
>
>
> "Sackflug" is usually referred to as a "Steady State Stall" or "Parachute
> Stall" in English
I used to enjoy doing this on displays to thrill the crowds.
To the uninitiated it looks like the canopy has irretrievably
collapsed and the high rate of descent makes it look like
injury is certain.
If you can pull the brake lines down far enough it's
possible to fly a 7 cell backward with full directional
control. Transitioning back to foward flight again can
be exciting as the cells re-inflate unevenly and toss
you around.
I don't do this anymore. Once the pilot chute got blown
over the leading edge and took a loop around the A lines.
When I re-inflated the cells, the pilot chute stuck there
the centre cells stayed partially collapsed. The canopy
was "pinched" in the middle and barely controllable.
I landed carefully.
--
Made in New Zealand --> Brent Callaghan @ Sun Microsystems
Email: br...@Eng.Sun.COM
phone: (415) 336 1051