Originally Posted by 300

Golly gee Mullet, you sure got me on that one!

Whew, my head is spinning

Gosh darn, what do I say to that???????? You are just the Sherlock Holmes of parachute deployment!

Hmmm, Let's see.

There are several factors going on here where I feel I can impart some wisdom to a person like yourself so you can get a better idea of the physics involved in the phenomenon you are observing.

Plato's cave shadows are making your ego write checks your limited understanding cannot cash!

1. A drag parachute is a different kind of application than a Mile or Bonneville parachute.

2. A drag chute is a bit larger and is designed to exert more deceleration G's than a Bonneville chute. It is designed to stop the car in a short shut down distance and characteristically has a shorter tether.

3. A mile/Bonneville chute is sized and designed differently to not exert as many deceleration G's to be either used as the initial slow-down chute to get the car from 250-300 down to a slower speed more gently for a longer shut down or as a pre-cursor to the second chute that will exert higher G's to stop the car more quickly if necessary once some of the speed is scrubbed off. This chute also has a longer tether that minimizes the unsettling on the car from side to side parachute movement which increases stability. The shorter tether with greater drag(deceleration drag if you will) will want to wag the back end of the car from side to side more than the lower deceleration coefficient bonneville chute with the longer tether.


With this being said, and having seen the mounting point in pics looking to be pretty close to the center of gravity for what I have seen for other Corvettes, I do think the rear tires lifting 1.5-2" off the ground upon deployment would indicate the parachute design specs are incorrect for this particular Corvette's weight, speed and weight distribution.

I am sure you have seen the videos of this car with the hood off. It is a pretty radical setup placing some fairly large and heavy turbos ahead of the front axles. This, to me would make the rear of the car easier to lift especially with a parachute of improper specifications.

I will put this in terms that even a nutswinger like yourself and many others who do not want to embrace technical explanation:

It is a no-no to have the rear tires to lift off the ground no matter what.

So either the parachute tether point is too high, or the parachute is incorrectly designed for the application.

I would recommend calling Stroud Safety and having Bob build them a custom chute to more exact specifications for this Corvette's speed, weight and weight distribution. I do not know what the specs are of the current chute, but I am sure Bob Stroud could figure out a way to get the car to stop and not lift the rear of the car.

With all this being said, if you still wish to reference cars whose rear end's lift off the ground upon chute deployment as the paragon of parachute mounting and proper chute design excellence, then be my guest!

You can either be scientific, or take part in "Monkey see, Monkey do". The choice is up to you

Hope this helps!




Swing hard my friend, swing hard!

Originally Posted by Dr_jitsu

Were you just trying to explain why the rear end of this car is off the ground? If so, you did a poor job, please try harder.

Originally Posted by AudiBull

300, You've still got it backwards. If a mounting point is too high it lifts the front end. If it is too low it lifts the back end.

Originally Posted by 300

It is a no-no to have the rear tires to lift off the ground no matter what.

So either the parachute tether point is too high, or the parachute is incorrectly designed for the application.

Originally Posted by AtomicZ

Just some suckling on the ***** of knowledge handed down by 300.

Originally Posted by AudiBull

I'm pretty sure this is you stating the back end is off the ground because the tether point is too high. This is the opposite of what can happen under that scenario.

Originally Posted by 300

$ H it for brains, that is exactly what I have always said. Maybe you should re-read my posts as well especially the TTG vs other platforms thread where everything is explained clearly. I do not have the desire to go quote mysef and re-explain what I said.

The cliff notes version for this thread is that the mounting point looks like it could be fine without knowing where the engine is mounted in that car as compared to other corvettes' tether locations.

I said the chute might be too aggressive in terms of the decel G's and tether length.

1. Back end lift = no bueno.

2. Chute pulls back too hard can = back end lift

You guys are either very stupid or saying stuff to break my *****!

By the time I responded you had changed it to what is below after realizing your mistake

Hey, you are correct, that was what I had been saying all along. I just said too high instead of too low. My apologies.

All my posts in the TTG vs other platforms say too low of a mount will lift the car. Remember, I taught this to you

Originally Posted by 300

You must not have read my post. Maybe re-read my post and if you still don't get it, then call 911!



Hey, you are correct, that was what I had been saying all along. I just said too high instead of too low. My apologies.

All my posts in the TTG vs other platforms say too low of a mount will lift the car. Remember, I taught this to you

Originally Posted by AudiBull

When I wrote the post you quoted I was responding to your original post.



Not a big deal. It was a simple disconnect in relation to the time of the post being edited and me responding. Thanks for the apology, and yes in case you hadn't realized it, this whole entire thread was created and posted on simply to break your *****.

Originally Posted by Dr_jitsu

I believe he is oblivious to the OPs' purpose. My last post ^ will shed some light on the problem.