Forums: Skydiving: Gear and Rigging:
Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not?

 


packertom  (C License)

Feb 20, 2007, 8:00 AM
Post #1 of 136 (7732 views)
Shortcut
Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? Can't Post

at the PIA rigging forum a comment was put out by the sunpath rep that Derek Thomas wants RSLs to stay on rigs that were equipped with them and as a rigger you shouldn't pack one that has had the RSL removed. we've been back and forth on this for a while and I've seen memo's from sunpath stating that it is HIGHLY recommended for the rsl to stay on yada yada... what I would like to know is, what is the real no kidding manufacturers ruling on this subject. ie.. if there is an accident and that person has his RSL removed is sunpath going to tell the FAA that in their opinion the rig was not maintained in accordance with manufacturers recommendations? honestly riggers out there, until sunpath makes this issue clear, anyone packing a javelin that came from the factory with an rsl that no longer has an RSL on it is in a position of jeopardy, that includes packing the main because packing the main could be seen as placing into service a rig that has not been maintained IAW the manufacturers recommendaitons and is therefore unairworthy...

tom
www.velocitysportswear.com


Premier PhreeZone  (D License)
Moderator
Feb 20, 2007, 8:25 AM
Post #2 of 136 (7669 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Here is thier official statement.


I take it to mean that it should not be removed. Word was they are looking at revising their owners manual to state their position about removal. That brings up a side topic about what manual should be used at packing time, the version that shipped with it or a moree current one if the manual does not state that it supercedes all previous manuals?
Attachments: RSLpostion.pdf (57.0 KB)


ZigZagMarquis  (D License)

Feb 20, 2007, 8:26 AM
Post #3 of 136 (7667 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Tom... I've heard similar. Why don't you call up Sunpath and ask for written verification one way or the other.

I'd be currious to know what Sunpath's NO SHIT position is on this too. i.e...

1) Removal of the RSL from a Jav or Odessy voids the TSO and a rigger SHALL NOT pack one that has had the RSL removed.

OR

2) They HIGHLY RECOMMEND that the RSL shouldn't be removed and that riggers are advised not to pack rigs have had them removed.

I hate to sound like a lawyer, but if rig mfgr's don't want RSLs removed from their rigs and they don't want riggers packing their rigs that have had RSLs removed, they need to quit being meally mouthed about it, be more careful about the words they use in their manuals and state things very spicifically!

Of course, this opens them up to liability rather then dumping it all on the riggers in the field to deal with if the FAA and Lawyers come knocking. Mad


ZigZagMarquis  (D License)

Feb 20, 2007, 8:34 AM
Post #4 of 136 (7657 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

PZone... thanks for posting that.

I agree with you that Sunpath's statement... "permanent removal of this part is
highly discouraged and NOT recommended."... coming from the mfgr should carry a lot of weight, but it doesn't specifically state that permanent removal of the RSL from a Jav or Odyessy is something illegal that voids the TSO, SHALL NOT be done, etc.

My suspision is that if one were to talk to someone from Sunpath, that's what they would say, but they don't want to write it down.

Also, another good point is if they're DO update their manuals, what they should also do is clearly state which previous manuals and rigs (by DOM and s/n) the update supercedes... but they probably won't do that. Mad


divnswoop  (D 18276)

Feb 20, 2007, 8:52 AM
Post #5 of 136 (7630 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

The RSL is a specific component that is included in the *Approved Configuration* during the TSO process. That should make it pretty clear to any rigger, no?


ZigZagMarquis  (D License)

Feb 20, 2007, 9:15 AM
Post #6 of 136 (7595 views)
Shortcut
Re: [divnswoop] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The RSL is a specific component that is included in the *Approved Configuration* during the TSO process. That should make it pretty clear to any rigger, no?


No, its not clear, ergo all the discussions of Sunpath, Jav's & RSLs here and elsewhere.

Sunpath's memo, circa 16 May 2005...


To Whom It May Concern:
16 May 2005

Regarding the removal of the reserve static line (RSL) from Javelin and Javelin Odyssey
sport skydiving harness/container systems, the position of Sun Path Products, Inc is as
follows:

Our harness/container systems and all related accessories and components are tested in
accordance with SAE 8015 Rev. B. During our most current TSO testing, evaluation and
approval the Javelin and Javelin Odyssey harness/container system incorporates the
reserve static line as part of the complete system and permanent removal of this part is
highly discouraged and NOT recommended. Our reserve static line is built with a snap
shackle for easy disconnect from the main (wearers) left riser, if the user wishes to not
use the option.

Sincerely,
Dave Singer Derek Thomas
Engineer President/Owner
Sun Path Products, Inc


-------

If Sunpath really, NO SHIT, doewn't want RSLs removed from their rigs, the above should say...

"and permanent removal of this part SHALL NOT BE DONE."


I'll dig into it when I have more time, but my recollection of the TSOs are that if an RSL is to be included on the rig / system under test, that activation of the reserve has to be accomplished by the RSL for a ceratain number of the tests... not all of them. Thus, what difference does it make to the TSO for that system if the RSL lanyard is there, but not hooked up, or if the lanyard is gone altogether? Same thing different words, if the TSO for my Jav is still "valid" if the RSL is there, but disconnected when I jump it, how is that any different then if the lanyard is totally removed? There really is no difference, technically, but not the way the lawyers would see it, I'm sure.

I just wish Sunpath would take a firmer written stance on this one way or the other, quit sitting on the fence, saying that RSLs should be permanently removed from their rigs, but writting down something less clear.


(This post was edited by ZigZagMarquis on Feb 20, 2007, 9:21 AM)


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Feb 20, 2007, 9:35 AM
Post #7 of 136 (7576 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

>what is the real no kidding manufacturers ruling on this subject.

The FAA's ruling on the subject is that a rigger who packs a Javelin without the RSL is not following the manufacturer's instructions. Recently a rigger was officially reprimanded by the FAA when he removed the RSL at the jumper's request.

>anyone packing a javelin that came from the factory with an rsl
>that no longer has an RSL on it is in a position of jeopardy.

Yep.


(This post was edited by billvon on Feb 20, 2007, 9:35 AM)


ZigZagMarquis  (D License)

Feb 20, 2007, 10:11 AM
Post #8 of 136 (7541 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
In reply to:
what is the real no kidding manufacturers ruling on this subject.


The FAA's ruling on the subject is that a rigger who packs a Javelin without the RSL is not following the manufacturer's instructions. Recently a rigger was officially reprimanded by the FAA when he removed the RSL at the jumper's request.

Bill, thanks, not disagreeing with you, but do you have that in writting or can point us towards where its written down?


I'd still like to see Sunpath state something more firmly on this topic. They're continued un-clear (IMO) written guidance vs. what they "say" and "do" continues their "rep" as a company that builds a good product, but has shitty customer relations (also IMO).


divnswoop  (D 18276)

Feb 20, 2007, 10:24 AM
Post #9 of 136 (7528 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Quote:
I'd still like to see Sunpath state something more firmly on this topic.


As an FAA certified rigger I'm pretty concerned with what the FAA guildlines say. If the RSL is a component of an *approved configuration* I will not change that........Sunpath's wording has been pretty grey at best.....just my opinion though


kris2extreme  (C License)

Feb 20, 2007, 10:27 AM
Post #10 of 136 (7522 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

that was what my rigger had said following PIA. He informed me and a couple of others who jump Javelins without RSL's that it didn't have to be hooked up, but had to be there for the repack.

I'm not sure if I'll get rid of my Javelin, or keep it for a second rig... but it has definitely pushed my timetable up for ordering a new and better fitting rig from another mfgr when I've got the cash to spare.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Feb 20, 2007, 10:48 AM
Post #11 of 136 (7510 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

>I'd still like to see Sunpath state something more firmly on this topic.

Give em a call. They're doing a manual rewrite soon; perhaps if they get enough phone calls they will change the text.


jheadley  (D 28710)

Feb 20, 2007, 11:59 AM
Post #12 of 136 (7471 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Are there other, or all, containers that this is true for?


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 20, 2007, 12:12 PM
Post #13 of 136 (7462 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree with you, that by their wording, the RSL is not required to be present.

No matter how strongly they recommend against it, it is allowed. I don't see how it could be interpreted any other way. This is their written position, it shouldn't matter what else was said at some conference. If they wanted it to be interpreted differently, then other language should have been used.

If the "approved configuration" part of their statement was important to this discussion, then they should not have left it open with "highly discouraged" and "not recommended". Those words do not mean "not allowed".


JerryBaumchen  (D 1543)

Feb 20, 2007, 12:18 PM
Post #14 of 136 (7456 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi packertom,

I attended their Q & A on Friday morning at the PIA. This is where they were packing a Jav w/SkyHook.

Derek Thomas said that when their new rig comes out (Mar '07 as I recall), meaning the Jav w/SkyHook option, all rigs (with or without the SkyHook) will have an RSL but it will look like a SkyHook equipped rig, i.e., it will use the curved pin attached to the lanyard & the Marine Eye attached to the cable. This will then definitely not allow the RSL to be removed; disconnected yes, but not removed.

I know this does not help with the arguement regarding the older/current Javs.

Jerry


pchapman  (D 1014)

Feb 20, 2007, 12:35 PM
Post #15 of 136 (7445 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

What's the background on this whole recommendation from Sun Path? Most rigs are used just fine with or without an RSL.

Do the owners just personally like RSL's a whole lot?
Is there some particular fear of a lawsuit if they don't make an RSL available?
Or do they just dislike it when someone removes the RSL without doing anything else, leaving the hook velcro to chew up the opposite reserve riser? As a rigger I dislike that too...


ripcord4  (D 2238)

Feb 20, 2007, 1:20 PM
Post #16 of 136 (7422 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

What's the big problem here about removing the RSL? If you don't like/want the RSL, just disconnect the damn thing - you don't have to remove it and you avoid the potential TSO question.


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 20, 2007, 1:27 PM
Post #17 of 136 (7415 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ripcord4] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
What's the big problem here about removing the RSL? If you don't like/want the RSL, just disconnect the damn thing - you don't have to remove it and you avoid the potential TSO question.

If a person has already removed it, then it is a big deal because it must be reinstalled, replacement parts may have to be bought.


klingeme  (D 24728)

Feb 20, 2007, 1:38 PM
Post #18 of 136 (7408 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

This sounds like a major problem for the riggers that are "Offically observing" all the packers on the packing floor, who are packing direcly under their ticket. So even if you know not to pack this, is Mr or Ms. I pack for $5 a head and don't have anything to offically loose going to know not to pack these rigs? if not there could be a lot of riggers loosing their tickets.

Just my 2 cents,
Mark Klingelhoefer


divnswoop  (D 18276)

Feb 20, 2007, 1:41 PM
Post #19 of 136 (7406 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

 
Quote:
If the "approved configuration" part of their statement was important to this discussion, then they should not have left it open with "highly discouraged" and "not recommended". Those words do not mean "not allowed".

I understand what your saying. I'm just trying to offer the other side of the story. If somebody bounced and the FAA started to really dig deep on the issue and found out that a component that was there during the TSO approval was no longer present....I wouldn't want my name on that card.


(This post was edited by divnswoop on Feb 20, 2007, 1:43 PM)


ZigZagMarquis  (D License)

Feb 20, 2007, 2:10 PM
Post #20 of 136 (7387 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
>I'd still like to see Sunpath state something more firmly on this topic.

Give em a call. They're doing a manual rewrite soon; perhaps if they get enough phone calls they will change the text.

True enough.

Help me help you.

Can you cast any more light and details on the comment you made up-thread about the FAA's ruling on the subject... etc... and... etc.... the FAA officially repremanding a rigger who packed a Jav with the RSL removed?

I'm willing to write a letter to Sunpath saying they need to clarify their wording on this subject and I'd like to reference the incident / official ruling you speak of.


(This post was edited by ZigZagMarquis on Feb 20, 2007, 2:12 PM)


skydivejunky  (D 22209)

Feb 20, 2007, 2:58 PM
Post #21 of 136 (7358 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Did all Javelins come with RSLs ? I've seen some that didn't have the velcro on the riser, or the rings on the top reserve flap. Did all the ones set up for RSLs come with one? Even if the owner didn't want it?

The Javelins that didn't come set up for RSLs aren't any different then the ones that came set up?

How do you know which ones are which?

John


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Feb 20, 2007, 4:42 PM
Post #22 of 136 (7318 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydivejunky] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
...How do you know which ones are which?...

Worth asking again....

Anyone?


fcajump  (D 15598)

Feb 20, 2007, 5:05 PM
Post #23 of 136 (7302 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydivejunky] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Did all Javelins come with RSLs ? I've seen some that didn't have the velcro on the riser, or the rings on the top reserve flap. Did all the ones set up for RSLs come with one? Even if the owner didn't want it?

The Javelins that didn't come set up for RSLs aren't any different then the ones that came set up?

How do you know which ones are which?

John

No. Not all came with an RSL, but I understand from Sunpath that they became standard (no option) quite a few years ago. This came up during a discussion about adding one to a 1989 rig that had never had one.

At the time, I understood their verbal position to be it was against the TSO to pack it without it in place IFF it was originally manufactured with one. (Jan 2006)

JW


johnny1488  (D 25453)

Feb 20, 2007, 5:05 PM
Post #24 of 136 (7300 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

From what I was told at the PIA is that the "permanently removed" that sunpath was unhappy with was people removing the rsl rings that the reserve ripcord must go through. That is permanent, as it was explained to me.

But.....

They also said that it was tested with the rsl and that is how it SHOULD remain.

Very wishy washy if you ask me.

Keep the rsl on if you want to cover your ass.


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 20, 2007, 5:42 PM
Post #25 of 136 (7279 views)
Shortcut
Re: [johnny1488] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
They also said that it was tested with the rsl and that is how it SHOULD remain.

Very wishy washy if you ask me.

Should is not the same as must, so it is only wishy washy in that they want it to happen without it being required, however, there is the reported case of a rigger being reprimanded by the FAA...


councilman24  (D 8631)

Feb 20, 2007, 7:02 PM
Post #26 of 136 (2418 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Mark Schlatter (sp? I never remember how) was the one that had personnal knowledge of this incident. I don't have a contact for him.


johnny1488  (D 25453)

Feb 20, 2007, 7:02 PM
Post #27 of 136 (2418 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

So it really doesn't matter what Sunpath means if that is how the FAA is gonna interpret it.


ZigZagMarquis  (D License)

Feb 20, 2007, 7:04 PM
Post #28 of 136 (2417 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
They also said that it was tested with the rsl and that is how it SHOULD remain.

Very wishy washy if you ask me.

Should is not the same as must, so it is only wishy washy in that they want it to happen without it being required, however, there is the reported case of a rigger being reprimanded by the FAA...

Yeah, that is the part I have a rub with and would still like somemore details (evidence) on.

If Sunpath is going to be wishy washy about what they say about RSLs on their rigs in writting, but their representatives verbally state more positively that the RSL must stay on, hooked up or not, to the FAA that the FAA is taking action based on this / the mfgr's intent vs. a rigger that packed a Jav sans RSL; bad on Sunpath for hanging someone out like that.


ZigZagMarquis  (D License)

Feb 20, 2007, 7:09 PM
Post #29 of 136 (2412 views)
Shortcut
Re: [councilman24] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Mark Schlatter (sp? I never remember how) was the one that had personnal knowledge of this incident. I don't have a contact for him.

Terry, thanks. I wish someone could come up with some written documentation on this incident. I'd love to write Sunpath about it.


Basically, IMO, this all boils down to if you own a Jav or Odyssey, you'd best leave the RSL lanyard on, even if you never hook it up. Bummer for the folks out there that have had it removed and now take it to a rigger that doesn't want to put his or her name on the card.

To a certain extent, I think Sunpath has brought this on themselves by writting down one thing and saying another.


(This post was edited by ZigZagMarquis on Feb 20, 2007, 7:11 PM)


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 20, 2007, 7:13 PM
Post #30 of 136 (2402 views)
Shortcut
Re: [johnny1488] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
So it really doesn't matter what Sunpath means if that is how the FAA is gonna interpret it.

Unfortunately, that is how many riggers will see it.

Sunpath should know darn well the meaning of the words they use in their publications. To go to the trouble of writing a special letter concerning the issue, and then to contradict that at PIA, is really bad form, in my opinion.


ZigZagMarquis  (D License)

Feb 20, 2007, 7:18 PM
Post #31 of 136 (2392 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

1) When it gets to the point where the FAA has to "interpret" things... we're screwed.

2) The "fix" to this is for Sunpath to more clearly and positively state things with regards to RSLs on their gear AND when updating their owners manuals clearly and specifically state that this "such and such" revision supercedes pervious versions... why... refer back to #1.


councilman24  (D 8631)

Feb 20, 2007, 7:21 PM
Post #32 of 136 (2386 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

I doubt there is any documentation available. They may have put the reprimand in writing but I'd doubt that it's publicly available unless we can find out who it was and he/she shares it. It may have been verbal, I don't remember if Mark said. And I expect is was one field inspector. Your mileage may vary with your local inspector.


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 20, 2007, 8:51 PM
Post #33 of 136 (2370 views)
Shortcut
Re: [councilman24] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Well I jump camera 95% of the time and when I got my new Jav in 98 the RSL was the first thing that was removed, I don't want it or need it, I don't lone my gear, I don't plan on reinstalling it period. But I guess every rigger out there will have to keep an eye out for rigs with them removed and get them replaced.


(This post was edited by stratostar on Feb 20, 2007, 9:11 PM)


Samurai136  (D 26609)

Feb 21, 2007, 1:48 AM
Post #34 of 136 (2341 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
PZone... thanks for posting that.

I agree with you that Sunpath's statement... "permanent removal of this part is
highly discouraged and NOT recommended."... coming from the mfgr should carry a lot of weight, but it doesn't specifically state that permanent removal of the RSL from a Jav or Odyessy is something illegal that voids the TSO, SHALL NOT be done, etc.

My suspision is that if one were to talk to someone from Sunpath, that's what they would say, but they don't want to write it down.

Also, another good point is if they're DO update their manuals, what they should also do is clearly state which previous manuals and rigs (by DOM and s/n) the update supercedes... but they probably won't do that. Mad


The parts list in the Sunpath manual makes no mention of an RSL.Smile

The RSL assembly instructions/ user orientation are supplemental. If you follow the packing instructions the rig will be sealed, dated, tools counted and put away before you find the first page that mentions the RSL. Wink

I hope Sunpath updates their manual with precise specific language on this topic.


Slyde  (D 7365)

Feb 21, 2007, 4:02 AM
Post #35 of 136 (2320 views)
Shortcut
Re: [councilman24] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Investigating the John Appleton fatality, Dallas FSDO inspector Gene Bland (a Master Rigger with 8000 jumps) questioned whether the rigger could legally have removed Appleton's RSL as he had done.
In an unsigned letter on Sunpath letterhead, Sunpath said they DO NOT recommend that the RSL be removed.
Bland (now retired) sent the letter to me and I circulated it to local riggers around Skydive Dallas.
I believe the rigger was NOT violated, only advised by FAA.

Mark Schlatter (DPRE)
mschlatter@msn.com

You nailed the spelling Terry.


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 21, 2007, 5:39 AM
Post #36 of 136 (2302 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Slyde] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Investigating the John Appleton fatality, Dallas FSDO inspector Gene Bland (a Master Rigger with 8000 jumps) questioned whether the rigger could legally have removed Appleton's RSL as he had done.
In an unsigned letter on Sunpath letterhead, Sunpath said they DO NOT recommend that the RSL be removed.
Bland (now retired) sent the letter to me and I circulated it to local riggers around Skydive Dallas.
I believe the rigger was NOT violated, only advised by FAA.

Mark Schlatter (DPRE)
mschlatter@msn.com

You nailed the spelling Terry.

So, there is nothing to get worked up about. We know Sunpath's postion, and have confirmed that all the FAA did was circulate their request, nothing more.


Slyde  (D 7365)

Feb 21, 2007, 5:52 AM
Post #37 of 136 (2296 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Right Cliff, nothing at all to get worked up about; unless you have not yet learned to understand how the muddy water remains stirred to minimal translucence such than none can see through with certainty. It's a lot like the muggings at PIA and the way PIA chose to respond ... or not.


Slyde  (D 7365)

Feb 21, 2007, 6:02 AM
Post #38 of 136 (2291 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Slyde] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Post Script: Just received an email from a jumper whose writes: "
I just got my Javelin back from SunPath Yesterday. They wanted to pack my reserve and would have been quite happy to without an RSL."

Clear as mud. No?


ZigZagMarquis  (D License)

Feb 21, 2007, 6:11 AM
Post #39 of 136 (2284 views)
Shortcut
Re: [divnswoop] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The RSL is a specific component that is included in the *Approved Configuration* during the TSO process. That should make it pretty clear to any rigger, no?

OBE at this point in the discussion, I suppose, but this is what I was thinking of:


4.3.6.2 Breakaway Drop Tests:

Eight drops shall be made by a person weighing not more than the maximum
operating weight by breaking away from an open and normally functioning main
parachute canopy with a vertical velocity of less than 20 FPS (6.1 m/s) at the time
of breakaway and actuating the reserve pack within 2 s of the breakaway. If a
reserve static line is part of the assembly, no less than 4 of the breakaway
drops shall be made with the reserve static line actuating the reserve pack.
The parachute canopy must be functionally open within the time +2 s, or
altitude, obtained in 4.3.6 from the time of breakaway.



i.e. ... during the TSO tests, if an RSL is part of the assembly, it has to be used to activate teh reserve for SOME OF, but not ALL OF the drop tests.


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 21, 2007, 7:24 AM
Post #40 of 136 (2263 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Slyde] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

...minimal translucence...Laugh

What muggings? I must have missed that thread.


fcajump  (D 15598)

Feb 21, 2007, 8:32 AM
Post #41 of 136 (2264 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Slyde] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Post Script: Just received an email from a jumper whose writes: "
I just got my Javelin back from SunPath Yesterday. They wanted to pack my reserve and would have been quite happy to without an RSL."

Clear as mud. No?

To be clear as to what your jumper wrote... was his rig originally made with an RSL? (not all were, and that might have lead to what on the surface seems to be an inconsistancy.)

JW


Slyde  (D 7365)

Feb 21, 2007, 11:53 AM
Post #42 of 136 (2220 views)
Shortcut
Re: [fcajump] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Yes. He went on to say his rig has velcro applied to cover the velcro on his reserve risers.


AirDive  (D License)

Feb 21, 2007, 12:56 PM
Post #43 of 136 (2197 views)
Shortcut
Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

It seems that as long as it does not require stitching to restore the RSL it's not permanently removed. Since an RSL alone can be fatal in some situations it would be a mistake to require it, that might be why they don't.


ZigZagMarquis  (D License)

Feb 21, 2007, 1:18 PM
Post #44 of 136 (2187 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AirDive] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Since an RSL alone can be fatal in some situations it would be a mistake to require it, that might be why they don't.

AirDive... sorry, I'm going to call you on this one... What are these situations, specifically, are these where an RSL can be fatal?


Hooknswoop  (D License)

Feb 21, 2007, 2:38 PM
Post #45 of 136 (2160 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
AirDive... sorry, I'm going to call you on this one... What are these situations, specifically, are these where an RSL can be fatal?

I can think of at least 5 where the jumper would have probably lived if they did not have an RSL. Tandem breaking a riser and the RSL firing the reserve into the main. A SEAL having the reserve deployed into their main when they deployed.

ďThe rapid deployment of the reserve via the RSL resulted in his capturing the reserve pilot chute on his right arm. One report indicates the reserve lines also entangled with his neck. The reserve never cleared the freebag.Ē

Description: The Navy was at Elsinore training Seals; they had their own instructors and their own equipment. At the time of this report, no detailed analysis of the rig has yet been made. This report is based on preliminary examinations and eyewitness accounts. The student ( training under the Navy's equivalent of AFF) deployed his main normally at around 4500 feet. During the main deployment the RSL somehow deployed his reserve which then entangled in the main. Someone supposedly had seen that his main was square and apparently flyable while the reserve was completely fouled and entangled in his main lines. No one directly witnessed the incident while the student was between 4000 and 2500 feet. Somewhere during that interval the student apparently cutaway his main which then collapsed and remained entangled with his fouled reserve. It was believed that if he had not cutaway, he may have been able to land relatively safely on his main. The reserve was apparently NOT deployed by his CYPRES: the preliminary examination revealed a kink in the reserve ripcord where the RSL must have pulled against it while it was still under tension from the closing loop. As soon as the rig is released by the coroner more detailed examinations are going to happen by the DZO, the USPA, the rig manufacturer and the Navy. It is unknown at this time what pulled the RSL, it may have been improperly routed and was pulled on line stretch, or it may have been caught by a toggle. It is also unknown if this type of malfunction is particular to this type of rig or is an industry-wide concern. The Navy has stood down their training and grounded all of their equipment until more is known about the true cause of the incident"

"Description: After a four way jump, the deceased suffered a violently spinning malfunction on his Startrac 2 main canopy, which he cutaway from at a low altitude. While unstable, at about 800-900 ft, he deployed his reserve. It (a Swift) opened into into serious line twists, potentially due to his unstable attitude during reserve deployment. He landed extremely hard under a partially-inflated reserve. The reserve was found to still have about 5 line twists. Reportedly, the risers were tangled around his throat, perhaps strangling him during decent. He weighed about 215 lbs and was jumping a Racer with a Pull-out main deployment system. He had been involved in the sport for 35 years."

Search the incident databases, RSL's have killed people.

Kind of a pet peeve of mine when people think that RSL's have never killed anyone. The information is out there.

Also, do a search for: "Facts about the "Reserve Staticline Lanyard"

Derek


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 21, 2007, 2:46 PM
Post #46 of 136 (2153 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

I have yet to meet a camera flyer that jumps with an active RSL, while there maybe some out there who do, I don't know of any and I think most would say not a good idea to do so.


ZigZagMarquis  (D License)

Feb 21, 2007, 2:56 PM
Post #47 of 136 (2150 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Yeah, I've heard that dogma before... but I also know a... dead... camera man that would probalby be alive it he had an RSL or AAD... cut-away a mal and spent the rest of his life trying to locate and pull his reserve handle with blood curdling screams just before impact.

Anyway... HNS posted some good info too.... to which... MY pet peave is folks to bang RSLs or AADs or this or that in the sport because of "hearsay" or bcause of what the "cool guys do or say" and not because of a decission based on real info... at least HNS makes his decission / opion based on real info, can't argue with that.


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 21, 2007, 5:59 PM
Post #48 of 136 (2115 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
MY pet peave is folks to bang RSLs or AADs or this or that in the sport because of "hearsay" or bcause of what the "cool guys do or say" and not because of a decission based on real info

Well I can't speak for every other camera flyer out there, but I made the decission based upon the size of some of the crap placed on top on my helmet and the very real possiblity that due to the sizes involved a wrap/snag could happen very easy, even in a cutaway, say with line twist that travel to the risers and twist them up. If you have ever had that happen to you with a large camera set up to the point where your head is pinned downward and you can't look up to see WTF is going on then you would understand. My decission to remove my RSL had nothing to do with "hearsay" or because the "cool guys" do it. It come down to common sense, if I have to cutaway and get wraped/snag I want the chance to use the helmet cutaway (if your neck isn't snapped) to remove it before my reserve gets dumped into a ball of shit over my head. The bottom line is, it is up to each jumper to assess the risk level and make choices that best fit their level of risk for the type of skydive they do. I decided over 11 years ago an RSL added more risk to me as a camera flyer, that is my personal choice and if you feel more comfort jumping an RSL for your the type of skydiving you do, that is your choice.

No where in any of my posts have I ever said jumping with and AAD or RSL is a bad idea, for most jumpers. I do however feel mandatory AAD's is stupid and no one should be forced to jump one, that should remain a personal choice.


(This post was edited by stratostar on Feb 21, 2007, 6:01 PM)


Premier slotperfect  (D 13014)
Moderator
Feb 21, 2007, 6:24 PM
Post #49 of 136 (2105 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

This is already spinning off into a "to RSL or not to RSL" conversation, which is important but has been discussed at length in several other threads. This thread is about removal of the RSL being legal or not.

Please keep this thread on track - feel free to resurrect one of the other RSL debate threads to continue that particular conversation.

Thanks,


ZigZagMarquis  (D License)

Feb 21, 2007, 7:49 PM
Post #50 of 136 (2081 views)
Shortcut
Re: [slotperfect] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

SLP... true enough.

Frankly... my "take-away" from this reserected argument over the permanent removal of an RSL from a Jav is my advice to folks that want a Jav, but don't want an RSL is to just leave the thing on and not hook it up... ya never know, you might change your mind. Smile


RiggerLee

Feb 22, 2007, 4:57 PM
Post #51 of 136 (2531 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

I ment to get around to posting this yesterday but It's been bussy. Sorry the story is so long.

First off I am the rigger or one of them that was involved with the Appleton rig. Let me say at the beginning that he was my friend and that every one at the drop zone liked him. He was one of the few really good people Iíve known and a good skydiver as well. He is still missed here. Now setting all that aside Iíll tell you the whole story. Iíve obviously been in the middle of this from the very beginning and there have been a number of little twists that donít necessarily show in just a straight rendition of the facts. Now Iím going to try and keep this as factual as I can but I can only tell it as I have seen it from my own point of view.

First off I did call Sunpath yesterday to try to get their latest position on this issue. Notice I said latest. Like a number of you that have called since PIA I couldnít get a real answer out of them. The guy I spoke to seems to be a really nice guy. They are kind of stuck on some technical issues. A lot of the questions seem to revolve around the TSO it self. In the end it comes down to the data package they submitted to the FAA, I suppose to the MIDO, in Atlanta when they originally drop tested the rig. Itís all about how it was written and the line drawing that was submitted. They have submitted several questions and are waiting for them to respond. This could and probable will take six weeks. Until then they will not release any written statement. The only thing I could get out of him was that they had drop tested the container both with and with out the RSL installed. He told me verbally that the rig was airworthy and could be packed and jumped with or with out the RSL installed. I asked him to please send that to me in writing and he refused. Now youíll notice that this conflicts with earlier statements and since it is not in writing every one is just hanging in the wind when the pendulum swings back the other way. Iím happy that they are working toward a final ruling but this waffling back and forth has been fairly characteristic of them through out this affair.

Here is a copy of the e-mail I sent them requesting written clarification. You might see if you have any questions to add.


I am requesting written clarification on the following questions in regards to the airworthiness of the system and compliance with the TSO. I would like to avoid any ambiguity in the answers and would like them in a yes or no format if possible.

If a RSL has been previously removed is it legal and air worthy to jump?

If a RSL has been previously removed is it legal for a rigger to repack the reserve with out the RSL in place?

Is it legal for a master or a senior rigger to assemble or remove the RSL on a Javelin or Odyssey container?

In these questions I use the word removed to mean not including the RSL in the assembly of rig when the ripcord is installed. If the Velcro or guide rings have been removed from the container how does that affect the legality and airworthiness of the rig?

If the Velcro and guide rings have been removed will you provide instructions and approve the reinstallation by a master rigger?

Is there a DOM or serial number at which your position on the RSL changes if so please clarify your position on each of these questions.


Lee Hardesty
Sen. Rigger
Velocity Sportswear
P.O. Box 312
Whitewright, TX 75491
903 364 1700
lee@velocitysportswear.com



The story: This actually starts well before the accident. John had just gotten two brand new Javelins. We loved him to death but he was a rich fucker and changed gear like we changed socks. They came packed from the factory ready to jump. Heíd had them for a couple of months. He was getting ready to leave for some kind of big way camp, I think it was in AZ. He went to Terry Irving, she was the master rigger that was doing most of the school rigging up in the loft at the time, and asked her to remove his RSL.

Lets do an aside here and review the thinking on all of this at the time. Javelins originally came with or with out an RSL. You had to pay x amount extra for one. No one I have ever known even thought twice about taking them on or off. The one thing you had to be careful of was that the handle had a slightly longer cable on the RSL side. That in it self was an item that is often replaced when it is lost in a cut away. Iíll get to that later. When Javelin took some of their options and made them standard and inclusive in the price of the rig as a marketing program no one thought any thing about it. And now since there was no longer the need for an extra chapter on how to hook up the RSL on special RSL equipped rigs the Manual simply glazed over it with a small comment that the RSL that was formerly optional was now standard so people would not become panicked if they saw an older rig with out one. ďYes itís ok, the rings in the drawing were never there to begin with.Ē

Now, back to Appleton. Terry was busy. She could not get to it. Now I happened to have walked in and she flagged me down and asked if I wanted to do a repack. Well I didnít have much going on and we all liked John so sure whereís the rig. I take the thing up stairs and start to look it over. I remember all of this not because of his death but because of what we found in side. Iíve done a lot of rigging at times and I deffinently donít remember them all but we got a good laugh that day and itís enough for me to recall the pack job. First thing I notice is that he doesnít need a pack job. Heís still in date. So I go down stairs to see if itís the wrong rig. Nope this is the one. He wanted the RSL off and was willing to pay for the repack to do it. I did point out to him that all he had to do was unhook the snap shackle and it would do the same thing and that he should just save his money and yank it at the next cycle. Notice that neither I nor the master rigger that gave me this project even thought to mention any type of airworthiness issue. What issue? I was just trying to save John $50 bucks. Well like I said he had dough and probable would not have blinked an eye if it were $500. Ok, far be it from me to turn down cash. Unlike John Iím not rich. So I go back up and pop the rig.

This is where it got interesting. This doesnít have any thing to do with his accident but it is why I and every one else remember the pack job. The spring did not go boing out of the container. The flaps just kind of lifted and the cap with what looked like a little black ball on the bottom of it just kind of fell off to the side. ďThatís oddĒ. This comes under the heading of things that make you go ďHmmm.Ē I reached down and picked up the ďballĒ by the 12 in of bridal that came out when it fell over. ďThatís niftyĒ. It was indeed the pilot chute. Some body had gotten very creative when they packed it. They had pulled every bit of fabric and mesh down to the bottom and then proceeded to twist it as tight as they could. They had then coiled this ďropeĒ under the flap. It had been packed up for about three months and had set like that. The pilot chute spring had not been able to unroll it and instead of springing had just bent in half in a u kind of shape. ďWell, it would seem there is a new type of packing technique being practiced at the Sunpath factory. I should study this more closely.Ē I started to swing the PC back and forth trying to get it to inflate. No Joy. Even yanking on it I could only get it to expand to about a 90 deg. Bend in the spring. It still would not catch any air. ďThe others have got to see this.Ē So I go down stairs and find Terry and a couple of other riggers, you canít shoot a rubber band with out hitting one of us, and drug them up stairs to see the newest factory approved technique. Every one got a laugh playing with it. I think John McCollum still has the pictures. Within the next half hour every rigger on the drop zone managed to come up and look at this beauty. Of course Tom goes and grabs Appleton and tells him that he was ďGoing to fucking die.Ē And all that and gets him all scared. He didnít even know how to pack his main. I wouldnít have done that my self but it did get me a good tip. Not that I did any thing. We found it because he didnít care about pissing away $50. Now none of this has a damn thing to do with the story but this is why I remember the whole incident. So to conclude I pulled the RSL off, trimmed down a peace of Velcro and stuck it on the hook and repacked the rig. Took it down stairs and dropped the rig off with Terry and got paid. I did in fact mark on the card that Iíd removed the RSL so that no one would think that that out of cycle repack had been a ride. That nearly hung me.

We skip ahead to the day that I drove over to the DZ. We had our own Loft by then in town. I walk into the gear store and the mood is rather somber. I over heard part of a conversation on the phone. It sounds rather suspicious and I asked if something had happened. That was when I was told that Appleton had gone in. Iíve lost count of how many fatalities Iíve been present during. There is always the same kind of sick empty feeling especially when it was a friend.

Some of these things are boring and almost closed cases from the start. This one was odd and left some unanswered questions. Youíll hear fifty different stories from fifty different people but here is what I think we can say. He had a malfunction on his main. He attempted to cut away. One riser for whatever reason failed to release. The reserve deployed. It entangled with the main. The other riser released but the canopies were now entangled. At some point the reserve handle had been pulled. He spun in and did not survive. In the end thatís all that can really be said about the incident.

Now letís talk about the gear. There were several repacks on the rig since I packed it and removed the RSL. One at least was a cut away. The cut away handle had been replaced with one from RWS. Heíd specifically requested one with their larger ridged tube inside. It was inspected by Gene Bland from the FSDO, Master rigger from way back, and John Stanford, manufacturer and master rigger from just about the beginning of time. Bland is good but a little out of date. Stanford is just about the sharpest rigger I know. They do not miss things. They inspected the gear down at the morgue. They found no problems with it. The risers seemed it be in spec. When suspended the left side cut away about 1.5 inches of pull after the right. That sounds just about perfect.

I donít like to speak ill of the dead, especially a friend, but I think he just got casual. He pulled until he felt himself drop and punched the reserve. The rig did exactly as it was supposed to do. It chopped the right side first. The reserve went up and the main as it spun above him entangled with the reserve. I have no doubt it happened quickly and by the time he realized what was happening it was too late. He just got sloppy and failed to pull his handle to full arm extension. He failed to fully cut away before he himself fired his own reserve into the streamer above his head. Now that sounds harsh as shit but thatís how I read it. There are plenty of other stories to explain what happened. Every one has their own idea and there have been some doozies put forward.

Now lets talk about the aftermath. Iíd like to say that the fact that it was Appleton had nothing to do with the treatment of the case. The truth is he was well known. Not as old in the sport as some and he didnít go around waving his arms screaming ďLook at me. Iím so great!Ē as has become the fashion with people trying to make a living in this sport and aspire to eat stake and living in something more then a run down trailer. He was just always there. He went to all the big ways and record attempts. People saw him. They knew him. He was liked and he was respected even if he couldnít pack for him self. He kind of set the standard for being a rich yuppie skydiver at our drop zone. Nobody was going to try to blame this on him and no one would say that he fucked up. Well Bland starts to look at this and sees I pulled the RSL off. So he looks in the manual. What does it say? That from such and such a date the rigs came standard with an RSL. Ok, So he calls them to ask what standard means? They immeadeently latch on to this saying that ďRSLís are mandatory on all of their rigs and the removal of it is undoubtedly what killed AppletonĒ. Itís looking bad for the old Leemister. Removing RSLís was a common and accepted practice on Javelins across the country but they had no problem throwing me to the wolves and cutting my throat on the alter to appease the FAA. It only took one person pointing out that if that made the javelin unairworthy that they had just grounded 80% or more of their fleet. You could hear the screeching of tires as they back peddled. Then they said, ďIt was an illegal alteration done by a sen. Rigger.Ē Wait. That grounds your fleet as well unless you had issued an alteration and each rig was signed off by a master rigger. Panic and confusion. ďIf the RSL has been removed before now then itís ok and you can continue to jump it but if you remove a RSL from now on then itís an illegal alteration and unairworthey.Ē Wait itís ether airworthy or not in that configuration right? ďWell only if it doesnít piss off our customers and make us look bad.Ē Ok, in all honestly they didnít say the last one. They really just wanted this whole thing to go away. Then they tried to shift the spotlight off their RSL on to other things. They tried to tell every one that it was not a riser release problem but a packing problem. Supposedly they found damage to a side flap and some stitches popped at the corner of the tray? Now I guess itís possible that Bland and Stanford missed something but let me tell you Iíve watched Bland inspect a rig following a fatality. He used a magnifying glass. He chided me for not keeping one in my rigging kit for that purpose. Between the two of them I donít buy that they missed any thing. Never the less the next time Jay, now the Sunpath rep, showed up there they had a new theory. He was going around trying to tell every one that would lessen that it was the packer that had killed Appleton. The Packer and the long break lines of his Specter. So Jeff was the next one on the chopping block. They had this elaborate scenario where you laid the break line like this and pulled the flap like that, and passed the flap through the loop and closed the other side with all the line clearly visible on top of the flaps, some one had to help him by the way he needed a third hand to make it work. And then when he when he goes to demonstrate how it turned into a horseshoe all it did was unstow the toggle. I never saw him succeed in making it work. He could not replicate it. Never the less he was still going around telling any one that would lessen that Jeff, a perfectly good packer and rigger, had killed Appleton. And the more you tried to reason with him the louder he would say it as if he could make him self right and win the argument through greater dessable power. So they had no problem feeding Jeff to the lionís ether to save there own reputation when as far as Iím concerned it was never in doubt. I jump a Javelin always have. And like I said, I think the rig did exactly what it was supposed to. Perfectly.

Bland was in the middle of all of this. Now a lot of people donít like him. He is a Fed and his eyes are rather beady and he can be a pain in the ass but the truth is heís not a bad guy. We talked about this and he told me straight up that depending on how things turned out he might have to put a letter in my file. Iíve known him for years and he really wasnít out to get me. If he had been heíd have been picking his teeth with my bones. He wanted to address the issue of RSLís and there removal. He wanted to do it in a formal way so that there would not be any ambiguity in the future. The truth is that he was probably right. We have been rather blasť over the years about pulling them on and off. There has been a lot of discussion about cable length. We swap out handles all the time, trimming them to fit. Just like some one did to Johns rig. We should probable be more careful about how we do that. I did not retrim his cables when I pulled the RSL. Some might but the next guy to jump his rig, he resold them, might want to put it back on. The difference in length is considered safe with an RSL installed. Iím inclined to leave it rather then risk some one putting the RSL back on and then having a premature release on the wrong side. You could say I should have trimmed it but frankly I donít trust the next rigger to buy a whole new handle to replace that length and trimming the other side below min. is not a good answer. I stand by that call. And by the way that one worked fine. It was a replacement handle that was on there in the accident. I donít think that was an issue ether though. The functional test seemed to come out right on the dot and the pull was a comfortable length. Never the less Sunpath seemed to feel that that handle was wildly out of spec.

So to conclude, what can I really tell you? Skydivers today know less about their gear then any time in the past. They are afraid of it. Sunpath and other manufacturers fear rumor. A bad rep can bring down a whole company. Not to mention a lawsuit tried before a judge or God help you a jury of woofos that is even more of a disaster. They will say what ever it takes to protect their market share. They will not stand behind you or even what they previously said. They will look for anyone they can find to place the blame on rather then them selves. In this case they were not even willing to place the blame on a well known and liked skydiver and sought to find other people to march in front of the firing squad and had no compunction about throwing peoples reputation or even there ticket or career to the wind. Not to mention the possibility of a lawsuit if the family should come looking for some ones head. Their verbal statements change on a daily bases. They refuse to make any statement in writing. They will tell me verbally to pack a rig and that I am safe and covered but refuse to state the same thing in a written signed letter. Until they will give you a signed instruction every one of you right down to the rigger on the floor with Josť closing a main beside him. Is swinging in the wind. When your customer goes in with out pulling his reserve on the next main you closeÖ More then just your head is on the chopping block. And his ďOh, your fine packing that.Ē On the phone will not count for shit. Especially with this company. Hence why Iím spending a lot more time printing T-shirts.

Lee Hardesty
Sen. Rigger
Velocity Sportswear
P.O. Box 312
Whitewright, TX 75491
903 364 1700
lee@velocitysportswear.com
www.velocitysportswear.com


RiggerLee

Feb 25, 2007, 2:04 PM
Post #52 of 136 (2429 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

 

Iíd like to add a question. We were having a conversation about the possible consequences of all of this. Iím specifically looking for some one with legal insight, i.e. a lawyer. Letís say a guy goes in in the next six weeks while we wait for a ruling from the FAA. For the sake of argument well say it was a no pull after a cut away. SP is confronted by the lawyer of the vindictive family. They cave and run for cover behind the statement that the rig was illegal with out the RSL. The question we were kicking around is what could this mean?

Letís take the drop zone here as an example. Guy showed up from out of town and filled out a waver. A rigger from the drop zone did a gear check and signed off on the waver that the gear was airworthy and good to jump. A packer on the floor packed his main. He is an employ of the drop zone with a 1099 on file. He is working under the supervision of yet another rigger, employ of the drop zone. The poor guy gets on a plane and goes in.

So where are we at. Weíve got the rigger at home, the rigger here that signed off the gear, the packer, the supervising rigger, and the pilot. All but the rigger at home are in one way or another employs of the DZ. Now let me clarify that. There are actually several companies that own different things and the paper work is probably good enough to hold up. The waver is pretty good. So I mean thy are doing the best to defend them selves. Still I know there are limits to all of this. I understand that if they can prove grows negligence that a lot of the protection granted by the wavers and the incorporation goes away. I guess the question is what could be the consequences for these people personaly and the DZ? Could this actually crack the structure of the drop zone and attack some of the real assets? If the DZ was not as well protected or they found a hole in the bookkeeping or the paper work how bad could it really be? Is it limited to the people involved or cold it go higher?

Lee


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Feb 25, 2007, 3:24 PM
Post #53 of 136 (2414 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

>I guess the question is what could be the consequences for these people personaly and the DZ?

If you're asking about a civil suit, they go after EVERYONE. In a now-famous case, they once went after Square One because there was a Square One packing data card in the rig. Note that the rig was not manufactured or maintained by Square One, nor did they sell it or really have anything to do with it. The rig just happened to have a Square One packing data card. (Square One no longer prints packing data cards with their names on it.)

Could they have won the resulting case? Probably not. But they could certainly drag them into a courtroom and cost them tens of thousands in legal fees - and thus force them to settle for a few thousand.


RiggerLee

Feb 25, 2007, 9:26 PM
Post #54 of 136 (2375 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

This came in as a pm but it's relative enough that I thought it wouldn't hurt to share. Also I thought it might not hurt to clarify what I was asking.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Reply To
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


I guess the question is what could be the consequences for these people personaly and the DZ?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The attorneys need look no further than Part 105. The FFA all but spelled out the people that could be held responsible.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ß 105.3____ Definitions.

For the purposes of this partó

Parachute operation means the performance of all activity for the purpose of, or in support of, a parachute jump or a parachute drop. This parachute operation can involve, but is not limited to, the following persons: parachutist, parachutist in command and passenger in tandem parachute operations, drop zone or owner or operator, jump master, certificated parachute rigger, or pilot.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Michael


I responded:


Yes, that is where the FAA would begin. I'm not sure where that would leave a private lawyer. They seem to in some ways have a lot more freedom in who they name in a law suit. On the other hand when the waver is signed the signe gives up a lot of rights. One of which is the right to sue some of these people. Now we come to the question of whether the waver covers 1099 employs? Does any of this constatute grose crimanal neglegence? If so how far can the law suit go? I guess it's mostly a question of cival law rather then the FAA. At least those are the questions I was trying to get at.

Lee


RiggerLee

Feb 26, 2007, 4:34 PM
Post #55 of 136 (2293 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

 

I just got back to the shop. We got this in today from SunPath. It came as an e-mail. So it's not a signed document but it's probable good enough. I'm surprised they haven't posted it here them selves. They say that a more formal statement will apear on there web site soon. If nothing else this seems to be a fairly clear statement as to where their position is going to fall. I have no doubt that they've aganised over this and the repocusions of it. There is going to be whining but the pain should be over rather quickly. So... any body got stack of RSL's out there?


Lee,

I understant that there has been alot of talk recently about this subject. A more formal address and clarification will be made soon on our website. I will answer your questions below:

1. If a RSL has been previously removed is it legal and air worthy to jump?

Yes, however the removal of the RSL or any RSL components must be noted on the packing data card by a MASTER RIGGER. This is considered an "alteration" to a TSO'ed system by the FAA. And, only a master rigger can "alter" a TSO'ed component.

2. If a RSL has been previously removed is it legal for a rigger to repack the reserve with out the RSL in place?

Yes, as long as the removal of the RSL components has been noted on the packing data card by a MASTER rigger.

3. Is it legal for a master or a senior rigger to A) assemble or B)remove the RSL on a Javelin or Odyssey container?

You have 2 questions here:

A) assemble: Yes, a senior rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITH an RSL

Yes, a Master rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITH an RSL

Yes, a Master rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITHOUT an RSL

Yes, a Master rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITHOUT an RSL as long as the removal of the components is noted on the packing data card by a MASTER RIGGER.

B) Remove: Yes and no. ONLY a Master rigger can remove components of the RSL from the system as long as that MASTER rigger notes it on the packing data card.

In these questions I use the word removed to mean not including the RSL in the assembly of rig when the ripcord is installed. If the Velcro or guide rings have been removed from the container how does that affect the legality and airworthiness of the rig?

I think the answers above have addressed this question.

If the Velcro and guide rings have been removed will you provide instructions and approve the reinstallation by a master rigger?

Yes, but we prefer it done here at the factory.

Is there a DOM or serial number at which your position on the RSL changes if so please clarify your position on each of these questions.

NO

The Sun Path policy regarding removal of the RSL components still holds true. The Javelin and Javelin Odyssey harness/container system incorporates the reserve static line as part of the complete system and permanent removal of this part is highly discouraged and NOT recommended. However, the last line in that letter will need to be amended to read, "Our reserve static line is built with a snap shackle for easy disconnect from the main riser, in the event of an emergency situation.

Please note: the USER or OWNER cannot legally remove the RSL lanyard unless he/she is a master parachute rigger. UNLESS, the user is in an emergency situation.

More to come on the website, I hope this is what you were looking for?

DAVE


Dave Singer
Engineer
SunPath Products, Inc
Phone (813) 782-9242
FAX (813) 788-3057
dave@sunpath.com


MrBrant  (B License)

Feb 26, 2007, 4:51 PM
Post #56 of 136 (2289 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

The Sun Path policy regarding removal of the RSL components still holds true. The Javelin and Javelin Odyssey harness/container system incorporates the reserve static line as part of the complete system and permanent removal of this part is highly discouraged and NOT recommended. However, the last line in that letter will need to be amended to read, "Our reserve static line is built with a snap shackle for easy disconnect from the main riser, in the event of an emergency situation.

Please note: the USER or OWNER cannot legally remove the RSL lanyard unless he/she is a master parachute rigger. UNLESS, the user is in an emergency situation.

This seems to mean that the user is not even "permitted" to un-shackle the RSL from the main riser.
Am I interpreting this wrong? I hope so - If not that's absolutely ridiculous! Unsure


MikeForsythe

Feb 26, 2007, 6:04 PM
Post #57 of 136 (2267 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Wow, did that add more confusion. I would like to hear from the FAA and some of the DPRE's.

How does removing the RSL become an alteration if even the end user can undo the clip and disable it? If the clip is undone then removing the RSL changes no function of the reserve system. I can see removing the rings and Velcro being an alteration (maybe) but given the present language that they are using I can't see removing the lanyard as such. In addition they have even said that the system was tested and approved with and without the RSL.

Sun Path could easily resolve this by simply saying that the RSL is required and is not to be removed.


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 26, 2007, 6:26 PM
Post #58 of 136 (2257 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MikeForsythe] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Sun Path could easily resolve this by simply saying that the RSL is required and is not to be removed.

If they did that, I think their sales would plummet.

I think they're trying to limit the impact of their previous stupid, cover-your-ass statements on their reputation and sales.


UDSkyJunkie  (D 25746)

Feb 26, 2007, 6:30 PM
Post #59 of 136 (2251 views)
Shortcut
Re: [divnswoop] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The RSL is a specific component that is included in the *Approved Configuration* during the TSO process. That should make it pretty clear to any rigger, no?

I would reluctantly agree with you IF all jav's were sold with an RSL installed. Since they are also sold without them installed, clearly that configuration is also approved. This can quickly get into a big argument about the definition of a "modification", and rigger privalages and a bunch of other BS.

I have to agree that the statment "highly recommended" is a poor choice of words. They should say "the RSL shall not be removed" or "removal of the RSL is considered a modification and can only be preformed by the manufacturer or a certificated master rigger" or "removal of the RSL is not recommended, but the system is certified for use without it".


MikeForsythe

Feb 26, 2007, 6:40 PM
Post #60 of 136 (2245 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
If they did that, I think their sales would plummet.
I completely agree. But they are the one who insisted that the RSL stay attached to make the rig as safe as possible. I do not think that leaving riggers and owners hanging (no pun intended) for as long as they have is right either. So in the end I guess it could be said that they want you to have a rig that is safe as possible..... as long as it does not affect the bottom line?


Samurai136  (D 26609)

Feb 26, 2007, 7:05 PM
Post #61 of 136 (2233 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
2. If a RSL has been previously removed is it legal for a rigger to repack the reserve with out the RSL in place?

Yes, as long as the removal of the RSL components has been noted on the packing data card by a MASTER rigger.

This is the worst answer I've heard from a manufacturer.Unimpressed

How many people at gear check-in (boogie/ new DZ) know all the master rigger's names, signatures and seals?Wink How many riggers have legible signatures?

Every gear check-in will require internet access to verify the rigger's certification (senior/ master) via the FAA database which can only be verified by a name search.


Someone tell me I'm wrong.
Tongue


Edit: True or false? Absence of an RSL lanyard does not make the rig unsafe or un-airworthy.


(This post was edited by Samurai136 on Feb 26, 2007, 7:07 PM)


kris2extreme  (C License)

Feb 26, 2007, 7:21 PM
Post #62 of 136 (2227 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Samurai136] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

I also would like a good clear yes or no answer. Because as it is right now, my rigger won't repack my rig... and the rsl guide rings and velcro are long gone.


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 26, 2007, 7:21 PM
Post #63 of 136 (2226 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Samurai136] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

People can always just put the visible portions of the RSL on the rig after it is packed (not actually functioning), and then remove it after passing gear check.


RiggerLee

Feb 26, 2007, 7:33 PM
Post #64 of 136 (2218 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

 
Huh? What visible portion are you refering to? The ring goes around the cable. I'm not sure which comment your responding to.

Every one does understand that the rings have to be on the flap right? That with out them to directionalize the pull you can just bend the pin 90 deg and break the RSL. You just wait I'll bet in the next six months you'll find a rig where some one just put the RSL on with no rings on the flap.

Lee


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 26, 2007, 7:37 PM
Post #65 of 136 (2213 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

I wasn't being too serious. Many such boogie gear checks don't even bother to open up the reserve flap, so you'd only need the shackle and the webbing leading away from it to satisfy them.


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 26, 2007, 7:53 PM
Post #66 of 136 (2204 views)
Shortcut
Re: [kris2extreme] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Good time to get your own ticket, then.Wink


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 26, 2007, 7:55 PM
Post #67 of 136 (2201 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Samurai136] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Absence of an RSL lanyard does not make the rig unsafe or un-airworthy.

True.


hookitt  (D License)

Feb 26, 2007, 8:13 PM
Post #68 of 136 (2193 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

The way the email reads, a senior rigger can not pack a Javelin with the RSL removed whether it's signed off or not.


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 26, 2007, 8:19 PM
Post #69 of 136 (2188 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hookitt] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
2. If a RSL has been previously removed is it legal for a rigger to repack the reserve with out the RSL in place?

Yes, as long as the removal of the RSL components has been noted on the packing data card by a MASTER rigger.

Interesting your take on the email, my take on the above was as long as it was noted and signed off by a master rigger (who removed it of courseWink) that is ok for a SR to repack it. I guess it all in how you read it.


hookitt  (D License)

Feb 26, 2007, 8:54 PM
Post #70 of 136 (2176 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

If you read the first part it appears the senior rigger can pack it.
Quote:
1. If a RSL has been previously removed is it legal and air worthy to jump?

Yes, however the removal of the RSL or any RSL components must be noted on the packing data card by a MASTER RIGGER. This is considered an "alteration" to a TSO'ed system by the FAA. And, only a master rigger can "alter" a TSO'ed component.

2. If a RSL has been previously removed is it legal for a rigger to repack the reserve with out the RSL in place?

Yes, as long as the removal of the RSL components has been noted on the packing data card by a MASTER rigger.

but this part, aside from the bold, leaves the senior rigger out.
Quote:
A) assemble: Yes, a senior rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITH an RSL

Yes, a Master rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITH an RSL

Yes, a Master rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITHOUT an RSL

Yes, a Master rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITHOUT an RSL as long as the removal of the components is noted on the packing data card by a MASTER RIGGER.

B) Remove: Yes and no. ONLY a Master rigger can remove components of the RSL from the system as long as that MASTER rigger notes it on the packing data card.

Choose which part to read and go with it.


TV1  (D 2227)

Feb 27, 2007, 2:20 AM
Post #71 of 136 (2161 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hookitt] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

A manufacturer has the right to do what he wants.... of course.
But - (in my eyes only...) Sunpath makes a problem where no problem is.
There are good reasons for skydivers all over the world to remove a RSL.
So it would be a great thing for every rig manufacturer to keep the RSL as what it is: An option...

A RSL can put more safty in a rig - but it can also create some problems I have not if I have no RSL, or isnīt?
The manufacturer is not with me in the air if something does not work properly. What will say the lawyer - and my wife - to the manufacturer if there is a problem with an RSL ??? It could be a better choice for the manufacturer to let be this a personal problem from the skydiver.
We mark the position RSL on the orderform - or not... Where is the real problem??? Crazy

But in the worst case there is in the real world always an opiton: the option to buy a rig with a different label on it.
(sorry for my bad english...Crazy)


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 27, 2007, 3:24 AM
Post #72 of 136 (2152 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hookitt] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Hook,
Please don't take my post as a "your wrong". I also saw the second paragraph and had to triple take it, but then went back over the whole thing. So my take on "their words" was as I posted. So as we all can see, I read it one way and you read it another, interesting, the whole issue is FUBAR!

Back to regular programing......Sly


SethInMI  (A 47765)

Feb 27, 2007, 6:52 AM
Post #73 of 136 (2123 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hookitt] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
but this part, aside from the [1st line], leaves the senior rigger out.
Quote:
A) assemble: Yes, a senior rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITH an RSL

Yes, a Master rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITH an RSL

Yes, a Master rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITHOUT an RSL

Yes, a Master rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITHOUT an RSL as long as the removal of the components is noted on the packing data card by a MASTER RIGGER.

Choose which part to read and go with it.

It seems to me that word Master I put in bold in the Sunpath email should read Senior. Otherwise that text line just restates the line above it, making no sense. If indeed that word was supposed to be Senior it was it was a bad misstatement by the Sunpath author. Just from reading the rest of the email it seems like that is what he is trying to say.

Seth


HSPScott  (D 22285)

Feb 27, 2007, 7:26 AM
Post #74 of 136 (2114 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

I recently received my Odyssey back from Sunpath from have the #3 reserve flap replaced. Directly below this flap are where the RSL guide rings are located. They were previously removed from my container after I was told by Sunpath that was ok to do so.

From the homepage Sunpath.com : There is a$15.00 inspection fee on ALL equipment sent in for repairs. No repairs will be processed without a completed repair sheet.

If the RSL was mandatory, why wasnít I notified that the rings would have to be put back on the rig?

Why would Sunpath do a repair on a container and send it back un-airworthy?


hookitt  (D License)

Feb 27, 2007, 9:16 AM
Post #75 of 136 (2084 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Hook,
Please don't take my post as a "your wrong".

Then post it as "You're wrong" and it's settled. I was just stirring the pot a little anyway. Wink

It appeared to be a typo, but how can one be sure given the ambiguous nature of previous writings Sun Path has bestowed upon the masses. Removing an RSL from a Javelin has occured for the life of the company. in 2007 a very lame ruling that is/was open for interpretation has being implimented.

Rigging is not rocket science. Preparing a closed ruling is pretty easy as well. Regardless, the new ruling is dumb.

From now on, any senior rigger is going to have to find a Master Rigger to sign off on the removal of an "Optional" item that does not change the function of the reserve system.

That's all I have time for with no time to proof read... Good day.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Feb 27, 2007, 9:24 AM
Post #76 of 136 (2499 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MrBrant] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

>This seems to mean that the user is not even "permitted" to un-shackle
>the RSL from the main riser. Am I interpreting this wrong?

"the USER or OWNER cannot legally remove the RSL lanyard unless he/she is a master parachute rigger. UNLESS, the user is in an emergency situation. "

I read that as "the user or owner cannot legally remove the RSL lanyard from the rig unless he/she is a master parachute rigger." That doesn't say the shackle can't be disconnected, just that the owner cannot remove the entire assembly.

(Note that merely tugging on the RSL lanyard will physically remove it completely after a reserve deployment; they seem to be explicitly OKing that.)


stratostar  (Student)

Feb 27, 2007, 10:33 AM
Post #77 of 136 (2488 views)
Shortcut
Re: [HSPScott] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

That's a good question, Truman.Sly


sundevil777  (D License)

Feb 27, 2007, 12:19 PM
Post #78 of 136 (2476 views)
Shortcut
Re: [HSPScott] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If the RSL was mandatory, why wasnít I notified that the rings would have to be put back on the rig?

Why would Sunpath do a repair on a container and send it back un-airworthy?

Because they are so busy trying to cover their ass for lawsuits, no matter what grief it causes their past and future customers, they don't even follow their own directions. However, I don't even think it accomplishes the supposed objective of covering their ass.

They don't seem to be able to write a coherent communication to their customers and regulatory authorities. First, they make a statement that has no enforcible meaning (recommending the RSL not be removed), only to directly contradict that in oral communications. Then they write a detailed instruction concerning what is required to remove it, but with an important typographical error.

That is really crappy customer service.


(This post was edited by sundevil777 on Feb 27, 2007, 12:21 PM)


MrBrant  (B License)

Feb 27, 2007, 9:12 PM
Post #79 of 136 (2426 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
(Note that merely tugging on the RSL lanyard will physically remove it completely after a reserve deployment; they seem to be explicitly OKing that.)

ah - there we go.

I was having trouble imagining how one could possibly remove the RSL in an emergency situation.
Now I'm on the trolley.

thanks!


airdog07  (Student)

Feb 27, 2007, 10:58 PM
Post #80 of 136 (2417 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sundevil777] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

not just a law suite remember reflex, form just one incidence they can be out of business. I still jump reflex there are good containers.
any body can work on airplane, from single to jet, you just can not sign off on it, you need a a & P. I think just like rigging senior can work on it but need the master to sign off on it.


hunters

Feb 28, 2007, 8:19 AM
Post #81 of 136 (2384 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ripcord4] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

 8015b provides no qualification tests with an rsl disconnected and unconstained. master rigger
In reply to:


skydivejunky  (D 22209)

Feb 28, 2007, 2:39 PM
Post #82 of 136 (2337 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Does anyone know when RSLs on Javelins were just an option? I noticed in one post that said it was a few years ago that they stopped making it an option. Just thought I'd add another twist in this twisted mess. Tongue


dorbie

Mar 1, 2007, 3:32 AM
Post #83 of 136 (2279 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
>This seems to mean that the user is not even "permitted" to un-shackle
>the RSL from the main riser. Am I interpreting this wrong?

"the USER or OWNER cannot legally remove the RSL lanyard unless he/she is a master parachute rigger. UNLESS, the user is in an emergency situation. "

I read that as "the user or owner cannot legally remove the RSL lanyard from the rig unless he/she is a master parachute rigger." That doesn't say the shackle can't be disconnected, just that the owner cannot remove the entire assembly.

(Note that merely tugging on the RSL lanyard will physically remove it completely after a reserve deployment; they seem to be explicitly OKing that.)

It needs better wording.


dorbie

Mar 1, 2007, 3:35 AM
Post #84 of 136 (2278 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
3. Is it legal for a master or a senior rigger to A) assemble or B)remove the RSL on a Javelin or Odyssey container?

You have 2 questions here:

A) assemble: Yes, a senior rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITH an RSL

Yes, a Master rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITH an RSL

Yes, a Master rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITHOUT an RSL

Yes, a Master rigger can assemble, pack and maintain a system WITHOUT an RSL as long as the removal of the components is noted on the packing data card by a MASTER RIGGER.

I'm quite sure the last sentence in the text I quoted above should begin "Yes, a senior rigger" and not "Yes, a Master rigger".

P.S. well either that or the redundancy and inconsistency represents a larger error during the editing process, so being reluctant to put words into Sunpath's mouth, this is something else that needs to be reworded.


(This post was edited by dorbie on Mar 1, 2007, 3:42 AM)


hunters

Mar 2, 2007, 10:02 AM
Post #85 of 136 (2199 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hunters] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
8015b provides no qualification tests with an rsl disconnected and unconstrained master rigger
In reply to:


RiggerLee

Mar 5, 2007, 3:56 PM
Post #86 of 136 (2127 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hunters] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

 
The word of God has been delivered down unto us. In other words it's up on the web site now. Please note how they are very specific about useing a terminal reserve pin. The reserve ripcord must be of sunpath manufacter. I guess that's in their line drawing as well. So much for interchangeability of tso'd parts. Isn't it interesting that they use the bent pins for their FXC instalations? Honestly I like my Javelin but they seem to be determind to make it difacult to own one.

Lee

Sorry I ment to include the link.
http://www.sunpath.com/downloads/bulletins/RSL_answers_2-27-07.pdf


(This post was edited by RiggerLee on Mar 5, 2007, 3:57 PM)


RiggerLee

Mar 5, 2007, 4:32 PM
Post #87 of 136 (2109 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

 
Another question that has come up. Early javelins that were built without a RSL? Acording to this they are unairworthy. Did Sunpath violate there own TSO when building them? If they are still airworthy how do you identify them? How do you seperate a legal rig from some one bullshiting you trying to tell you that it was never there? This is going to be a pain. I don't know about you but they just grounded 75% of the Javelins on the DZ. It's four days to the weeknd. I only have three RSL's and the DZ manager has had his head in the sand hoping this will all go away. He hasn't told or e-mailed any one. It's going to be a mess Saterday morning.

Lee


sundevil777  (D License)

Mar 5, 2007, 5:06 PM
Post #88 of 136 (2092 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Sunpath should have required that the rig comply by the next repack, or within a month, or something.

That kind of customer service will turn off both past and future customers. Given the many iterations of their "official" statements, I predict they will modify this one also (I hope for their sake).


stratostar  (Student)

Mar 5, 2007, 6:12 PM
Post #89 of 136 (2066 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Could this be why we see so many now on the market? HEY anyone want to buy mine.....Crazy


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Mar 5, 2007, 6:43 PM
Post #90 of 136 (2053 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

The language is interesting in that they seem to be implying that the Javelin cannot legally be JUMPED without the RSL. Unenforceable of course but a very strange thing to say. Legal CYA perhaps?

The text:

"The user can disengage the RSL lanyard by disconnecting the snap shackle only in an emergency situation." (Italics/underscore are theirs.)


(This post was edited by billvon on Mar 5, 2007, 6:44 PM)


packertom  (C License)

Mar 5, 2007, 8:21 PM
Post #91 of 136 (2027 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

basically, they are stating that you can not disconnect the RSL unless in an emergency situation... this gives Sunpath a legal out in that if you disconnect the RSL and bad things happen... they can argue that it was not an emergency and you are therefore responsible... this is not that big a deal and I don't blame them for placing this caveat in their statement.. having said that, I will say that this is liable to have a larger impact on the skydiving public than the Capewell bulletin did... beware guys and read the bulletins and for your own sakes stay in compliance... honestly, this has needed to come out.. I salute sunpath for coming out with this unequivicable statement...

Tom

www.velocitysportswear.com
tom@velocitysportswear.com


bob.dino  (E 2185)

Mar 5, 2007, 8:45 PM
Post #92 of 136 (2016 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
"The user can disengage the RSL lanyard by disconnecting the snap shackle only in an emergency situation." (Italics/underscore are theirs.)

No more casual CRW or camera if you own a Javelin then?


Premier faulknerwn  (D 17441)
Moderator
Mar 6, 2007, 6:35 AM
Post #93 of 136 (1970 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bob.dino] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

The US CRW team jumps Javelins too. Wonder how they're going to feel when they find out they have to have their RSL's connected?


Premier PhreeZone  (D License)
Moderator
Mar 6, 2007, 6:37 AM
Post #94 of 136 (1967 views)
Shortcut
Re: [faulknerwn] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

On that topic I wonder how all of Sunpath's sponsored teams are going to feel when they are told that their camera flyers need to have them installed and hooked up again or get a master rigger to alter them.


DougH  (D License)

Mar 6, 2007, 8:13 AM
Post #95 of 136 (1932 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

It is surprising that they are giving so many of their customers the big F U.


beowulf  (C License)

Mar 6, 2007, 8:43 AM
Post #96 of 136 (1915 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

I am glad that my Odyssey still has the RSL on it so I don't have to mess with any of this.

********************NOTICE to SUNPATH***************************


I will never purchase any of your products again. My next container will not be one of your products.


NickDG  (D 8904)

Mar 6, 2007, 8:49 AM
Post #97 of 136 (1907 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DougH] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Sun Path is using Riggers to shield themselves from liability. The simple solution is since no rig is airworthy without a Rigger's signature, all Riggers should just stop servicing Javelin/Odyssey rigs altogether. Sun Path will either change their tune or be out of business within a year.

I never "got" the Javelin anyway. All they did was take the Racer design and ruin it by adding flaps and putting the reserve pin on the wrong side of the rig . . .

NickD Smile
BASE 194


AMax

Mar 6, 2007, 8:56 AM
Post #98 of 136 (1898 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NickDG] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
... all Riggers should just stop servicing Javelin/Odyssey rigs altogether ...

This is ridiculous Unsure Do you really believe in what you just said?


stratostar  (Student)

Mar 6, 2007, 9:42 AM
Post #99 of 136 (1867 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AMax] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't find it all that ridiculous, I have better things to do with my time then search the data base to make sure the name signed on the data card is really a master rigger. Or not be able to repack someones rig who just lost a main canopy with the RSL attached to it, in order to get them in the air with a loner canopy, now we have to wait till the RSL lanyard can be replaced. Think it can't happen, I have had a number of jumpers over the years lose a main canopy and not be able to find it till the harvest season, come to get a repack to get back up in the air with loners. (same day as chop)


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Mar 6, 2007, 10:43 AM
Post #100 of 136 (1838 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bob.dino] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

>No more casual CRW or camera if you own a Javelin then?

Presumably if you follow the letter of their instructions, you must jump with it attached, then disconnect it before you cut away if you do not want the functionality. Seems awkward, but perhaps it's a legal CYA that Sunpath does not expect anyone to follow. On the other hand, perhaps cameramen/CRW people could add a small "Lutz strap" that connects the shackle release to the riser, so the RSL is automatically released before the reserve cable is pulled.

(Wasn't really serious about the Lutz strap, so don't anyone start doing it!)


CrazyL  (D 17699)

Mar 6, 2007, 10:55 AM
Post #101 of 136 (2190 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

There are a couple of things i'd like to add here. In the past: 1. removal of the RSL lanyard from a riser exposes the hook velcro to wear on the reserve riser that the velcro would then touch. Of course I would put pile velcro on to protect the hook velcro and riser,makes since, manufacturer verbally approved this method for me but not in writing. 2. The jumper may disconnect the RSl shackle as they choose. There are no instructions on where to connect the shackle when not in use, nor instructions to let it dangle free when unshackled.The RSL is still a live ripcord. Causes a guessing game for the jumper on what and where to hook up the RSl shackle when the shackle is disconnected by the jumper. You and I know ways to hook up an RSL to stow the shackle in a place where it will not affect the deployment or release system.


RiggerLee

Mar 6, 2007, 11:15 AM
Post #102 of 136 (2173 views)
Shortcut
Re: [CrazyL] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

 
In the past that was every ones understanding. The whole story changed when Appelton went in. Their new stand on the issue has no wiggle room in it.

Lee


dorbie

Mar 6, 2007, 1:11 PM
Post #103 of 136 (2138 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

I find it ridiculous that Sunpath are telling me I can't undo the snap shackle on my RSL unless I'm in an emergency. I was hoping that the call for clarification would result in a different response, and fall in line with your earlier interpretation Bill, but the opposite has happened, I guess that's why clarification was required.

Here I was fat, happy and stupid thinking I would be unaffected by this mess because my RSL is still on my Odyssey and now this. Is Sunpath TRYING to impact EVERY customer the have? My rig is pre 2007 it has no Collins lanyard (added because it's one of Bill's skyhook prerequisites, but it sure wouldn't have hurt Appleton to have one). This edict does not make jumpers with earlier Sunpath rigs safer IMHO.

It looks like CYA to me but it seems from other posts that Sunpath has been trying to triangulate a position w.r.t. the Appleton incident and they've really painted themselves into a corner with a succession of ill considered comments. This is just the latest itteration.


dorbie

Mar 6, 2007, 1:34 PM
Post #104 of 136 (2120 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RiggerLee] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In the past that was every ones understanding. The whole story changed when Appelton went in. Their new stand on the issue has no wiggle room in it.

Lee

Do the new RSL rules actually change things in relation to what happened to Appleton though? Wouldn't the local master rigger have signed off on the mod, then someone else would still have subsequently changed the cutaway cable and Appleton's rig would have been in the same configuration on that jump. The only difference would have been a master rigger's note on the packing card.

The biggest change Sunpath has made that could directly impact similar incidents is that Sunpath includes a Collins lanyard on new rigs. Any rig maker could have made that decision years before Appleton went in.


(This post was edited by dorbie on Mar 6, 2007, 1:36 PM)


sunshine  (D License)

Mar 6, 2007, 1:55 PM
Post #105 of 136 (2100 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PhreeZone] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
On that topic I wonder how all of Sunpath's sponsored teams are going to feel when they are told that their camera flyers need to have them installed and hooked up again or get a master rigger to alter them.

I'm sure they'll have no problemo getting a master rigger to sign off on the alteration.


wilcox

Mar 6, 2007, 2:03 PM
Post #106 of 136 (2100 views)
Shortcut
Re: Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Ridiculous.

Cutting the rings and velcro away does nothing for added safety.


(This post was edited by wilcox on Mar 6, 2007, 2:03 PM)


dorbie

Mar 6, 2007, 2:24 PM
Post #107 of 136 (2082 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wilcox] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Ridiculous.

Cutting the rings and velcro away does nothing for added safety.

Then if you're a Master Rigger you could simply remove the lanyard leave the rest in place and sign that off as the modification. If you're not you'll have to find one to agree with you and sign off on that.


AMax

Mar 6, 2007, 5:48 PM
Post #108 of 136 (2028 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

As a Javelin owner I am not happy about potential complications with RSL (I don't use one). However, an idea to refuse packing Javelins in response to new Sunpath service bulletin is simply ridiculous. Fortunately, it is highly unlikely that this idea will be supported by majority of riggers in US ... LOL Wink


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Mar 6, 2007, 6:54 PM
Post #109 of 136 (2006 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AMax] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

>Fortunately, it is highly unlikely that this idea will be supported by majority of riggers in US ... LOL

After what Sunpath did to a rigger that removed the RSL in a rig involved in an incident - I think many riggers will think twice about disregarding the bulletin.


stratostar  (Student)

Mar 6, 2007, 6:56 PM
Post #110 of 136 (2003 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AMax] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Just like there are those who refuse to or charge 3 times the going rate to pack racers or reflex's. Laugh all you want, I'll bet you will see some riggers refuse to service SP products, just as there are master in TX right now who refuse to sign off data cards for the removal of the RSL. Me personally I'm not worried about it there are two masters around who will sign off on it, so if someone shows up I will send them to the masters.Wink


(This post was edited by stratostar on Mar 6, 2007, 6:58 PM)


jdthomas  (D License)

Mar 6, 2007, 7:11 PM
Post #111 of 136 (1996 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

 If I held stock in Sunpath i would be selling right about now and getting out while I could.


stratostar  (Student)

Mar 6, 2007, 7:15 PM
Post #112 of 136 (1993 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jdthomas] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
If I held stock in Sunpath i would be selling right about now and getting out while I could.

Well I do and now the value of my rig just tanked.Wink


(This post was edited by stratostar on Mar 6, 2007, 7:16 PM)


dorbie

Mar 6, 2007, 9:35 PM
Post #113 of 136 (1956 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
If I held stock in Sunpath i would be selling right about now and getting out while I could.

Well I do and now the value of my rig just tanked.Wink

At least the waiting list will be nice & short for a new one with collins lanyard and skyhook.

Question: If the jumper is a Master Rigger can he undo his snap shackle before a jump?Laugh


stratostar  (Student)

Mar 6, 2007, 9:40 PM
Post #114 of 136 (1950 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dorbie] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Only if it noted on the data card & in his logbook, he intends to unshackle it and has a signed note from his mom....Tongue


wilcox

Mar 7, 2007, 4:50 AM
Post #115 of 136 (1897 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dorbie] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Question: If the jumper is a Master Rigger can he undo his snap shackle before a jump

LaughLaugh


jdthomas  (D License)

Mar 7, 2007, 5:02 AM
Post #116 of 136 (1894 views)
Shortcut
Re: [stratostar] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
If I held stock in Sunpath i would be selling right about now and getting out while I could.

Well I do and now the value of my rig just tanked.Wink

well there are some jumpers who actually want an RSL, so maybe the price of your rig is still decent!


fcajump  (D 15598)

Mar 7, 2007, 6:09 AM
Post #117 of 136 (1865 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
>Fortunately, it is highly unlikely that this idea will be supported by majority of riggers in US ... LOL

After what Sunpath did to a rigger that removed the RSL in a rig involved in an incident - I think many riggers will think twice about disregarding the bulletin.

Speaking only for myself (sr rigger), I certainly will not pack a rig without the RSL in place. I have also alearted all of the folks I pack for that have Javelin's of the policy on their web site. Were I a master rigger, I would be very reluctant to sign off on such a removal on any rig other than my own. This is (admittedly) a CYA attitude.

I am however, NOT in agreement with Sunpath. Situations as discussed here present jumps where the RSL might not be available or actually present an increased hazard...
Loaner canopy on non-RSL prepped risers.
Camera / CRW jumpers

However, in some offline discussions with them, it is MY understanding that they consider only the following to be legal:
1. Installed AND connected
2. Master Rigger removed and signed off
3. Emergency situations

I am sceptical as to how a fed would feel during a ramp check to learn that the jumper had boarded the aircraft with the RSL disconnected in a "pre-declared emergency"...

While I think RSLs are in general a good idea, I do not think this is the right approach.

BTW - their statement letter implies that this legal interpretation would apply to ALL rigs TSO'ed with an RSL (regardless of brand). Has anyone heard from other manufacturers on this?

Jim


klingeme  (D 24728)

Mar 7, 2007, 6:48 AM
Post #118 of 136 (1835 views)
Shortcut
Re: [fcajump] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Does "I was falling towards the earth at between 120 and 200 miles per hour" constitute an emergency situation for the FAA, if so, disconnecting the RSL would be alright for all jumps. Wink

Mark Klingelhoefer


Ms.sofaking

Mar 7, 2007, 7:18 AM
Post #119 of 136 (1822 views)
Shortcut
Re: [fcajump] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

 


Quote:
I am sceptical as to how a fed would feel during a ramp check to learn that the jumper had boarded the aircraft with the RSL disconnected in a "pre-declared emergency"...

If you had an RSL you could always disconnect on the plane.If you had a mal who is to say you didn't disconnect it then."Emergency situation" is left way open to interpretation.

But what about people who got their rig from the manufacturer without an RSL to begin with?What are they supposed to do?


fcajump  (D 15598)

Mar 7, 2007, 9:40 AM
Post #120 of 136 (1765 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ms.sofaking] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:


Quote:
I am sceptical as to how a fed would feel during a ramp check to learn that the jumper had boarded the aircraft with the RSL disconnected in a "pre-declared emergency"...

If you had an RSL you could always disconnect on the plane.If you had a mal who is to say you didn't disconnect it then."Emergency situation" is left way open to interpretation.

But what about people who got their rig from the manufacturer without an RSL to begin with?What are they supposed to do?

If I understood the reply I got from the factory, Javelins manufactured without an RSL now MUST be noted by a Master Rigger on the pack data card that the system was manufactured without one. (effectively, you have to get someone to attest to the non-alteration.)
OR you have to have one installed, which is itself an alteration.Unsure

Just what I was told...

JW


Ms.sofaking

Mar 7, 2007, 9:49 AM
Post #121 of 136 (1761 views)
Shortcut
Re: [fcajump] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

If a master rigger does this, will or can it ever be checked against a serial #?


fcajump  (D 15598)

Mar 7, 2007, 10:02 AM
Post #122 of 136 (1745 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ms.sofaking] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If a master rigger does this, will or can it ever be checked against a serial #?

Don't know... anyone else know?


Ms.sofaking

Mar 7, 2007, 10:06 AM
Post #123 of 136 (1742 views)
Shortcut
Re: [fcajump] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

It would be nice if we found a loop hole we could all jump throughWink


skydivejunky  (D 22209)

Mar 7, 2007, 10:09 AM
Post #124 of 136 (1741 views)
Shortcut
Re: [packertom] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Okay, I get a rig in to repack the reserve but it doesn't have the main and main risers, just the container and reserve. Can I pack it since I obviously can't hook up the shackle to the main risers? Or do I have to have the main to hook up the shackle? Guess I better call Sunpath and ask them eh?

John


snafuhere  (D 29581)

Mar 7, 2007, 10:32 AM
Post #125 of 136 (1721 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydivejunky] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I get a rig in to repack the reserve but it doesn't have the main and main risers, just the container and reserve. Can I pack it since I obviously can't hook up the shackle to the main risers?

another good point Unimpressed

I was observing the rsl discussion and:
1. returned my jav to rigger just after reserve repack to connect back the rsl lanyard
2. postponed my order for a new jav
3. started to look at vector

there are hundreds of new good points that stem from the javelin-pandora box


(This post was edited by snafuhere on Mar 7, 2007, 10:34 AM)


mr2mk1g  (C 103449)

Mar 7, 2007, 10:42 AM
Post #126 of 136 (1825 views)
Shortcut
Re: Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Ok, so a manufacturer can be the party making an alteration under AC-1052c, but according to Sun Path any such alteration has to be recorded on the packing data card... which Sun Path didn't do... so Sun Path sold containers which by their own definition were unairworthy at the time of sale??


mr2mk1g  (C 103449)

Mar 7, 2007, 10:48 AM
Post #127 of 136 (1818 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydivejunky] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Okay, I get a rig in to repack the reserve but it doesn't have the main and main risers, just the container and reserve.

No, if you extend Sun Path logic re the RSL shackle that couldn't occur...

...because releasing the RSL shackle in anything other than an emergency situation would be an alteration... which may only be done by a Master Rigger etc etc

So if Sun Path are right then you are effectively prevented from ever removing your risers from the container ever again... unless of course you are a Master Rigger and record the un-snapping of the shackle on the Data Card as an alteration etc etc...


fcajump  (D 15598)

Mar 7, 2007, 11:16 AM
Post #128 of 136 (1791 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mr2mk1g] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
Okay, I get a rig in to repack the reserve but it doesn't have the main and main risers, just the container and reserve.

No, if you extend Sun Path logic re the RSL shackle that couldn't occur...

...because releasing the RSL shackle in anything other than an emergency situation would be an alteration... which may only be done by a Master Rigger etc etc

So if Sun Path are right then you are effectively prevented from ever removing your risers from the container ever again... unless of course you are a Master Rigger and record the un-snapping of the shackle on the Data Card as an alteration etc etc...

Ah but that is simply an disassembly and reassembly of compatible components.

There... there's your loop-hole.Wink

J


rehmwa  (D 12816)

Mar 7, 2007, 11:29 AM
Post #129 of 136 (1775 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydivejunky] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Can I pack it since I obviously can't hook up the shackle to the main risers? Or do I have to have the main to hook up the shackle? Guess I better call Sunpath and ask them eh?

You'll be ok as long as you remember to do an obligatory chastising of the skydiver about leaving the RSL in place. Tongue

(It's fun to goof on this, and I do think this is goofy, but, at the same time, I also admire SunPath for coming out and trying to effect something they feel is the right thing to do. I'll stick with them and know that even when I disagree with them, they have my safety in mind). SP has always been fantastic to me.


JerryBaumchen  (D 1543)

Mar 7, 2007, 11:37 AM
Post #130 of 136 (1766 views)
Shortcut
Re: [skydivejunky] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi junky,

Quote:
Okay, I get a rig in to repack the reserve but it doesn't have the main and main risers, just the container and reserve. Can I pack it since I obviously can't hook up the shackle to the main risers?

I was just thinking the same thing later last night. It does seem as though the rigger should have the main risers there to know that they are correctly fitted to accept the Snap Shackle.Unsure

Jerry


skydivejunky  (D 22209)

Mar 7, 2007, 11:48 AM
Post #131 of 136 (1753 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rehmwa] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm not goofing really. How do I know they have risers with a ring for the shackle? Or does that not matter? Can I pack a Jav with the rsl on but not having a place to hook the shackle? Seems like that defeats the whole purpose.

John


diablopilot  (D License)

Mar 7, 2007, 3:11 PM
Post #132 of 136 (1690 views)
Shortcut
Re: [AMax] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
As a Javelin owner I am not happy about potential complications with RSL (I don't use one). However, an idea to refuse packing Javelins in response to new Sunpath service bulletin is simply ridiculous. Fortunately, it is highly unlikely that this idea will be supported by majority of riggers in US ... LOL Wink

Not as ridiculous as you might think. There is a huge number of riggers that refuse to pack a certain 2 pin rig.


stratostar  (Student)

Mar 7, 2007, 4:57 PM
Post #133 of 136 (1663 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Is there an echo in here, is there an echo in here. LOL.Tongue


davepend  (D 16439)

Mar 7, 2007, 7:44 PM
Post #134 of 136 (1620 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

I am neither a rigger nor a lawyer, and probably not any smarter than anyone else here, but no one's seemed to notice in the text of the bulletin:

Quote:
The user can ďdisengageĒ the RSL lanyard by disconnecting the snap shackle, if in an emergency situation or to avoid a possible emergency situation ONLY.

(emphasis theirs)

The important part here is "to avoid a possible emergency situation."

As a camera flyer (or skysurfer, or CReW person) I am avoiding a possible emergency by keeping my RSL snap shackle disconnected and stowed.

Perfectly legal sounding to me (again, not a lawyer).

-dp


stratostar  (Student)

Mar 7, 2007, 9:42 PM
Post #135 of 136 (1601 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davepend] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

Did you read the orginal statement? your quoting the the new version, and YES we all took notice.


dorbie

Mar 8, 2007, 4:45 AM
Post #136 of 136 (1559 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davepend] Javelin RSL.. unairworthy or not? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I am neither a rigger nor a lawyer, and probably not any smarter than anyone else here, but no one's seemed to notice in the text of the bulletin:

Quote:
The user can ďdisengageĒ the RSL lanyard by disconnecting the snap shackle, if in an emergency situation or to avoid a possible emergency situation ONLY.

(emphasis theirs)

The important part here is "to avoid a possible emergency situation."

That is a much improved rewording, I'm happier.

Here's the original:

http://www.dropzone.com/...tail_page.cgi?ID=658
http://www.sunpath.com/..._answers_2-27-07.pdf

dropzone.com should update the article or at least link to the revised pdf, here's the new URL:

http://www.sunpath.com/...s/RSL_MasterV1.2.pdf

Both versions are dated 2/27 but the dropzone.com article went up on 3/6 and has the old information and links to the old version, it's still wrong as of 3/8.


(This post was edited by dorbie on Mar 8, 2007, 4:53 AM)



Forums : Skydiving : Gear and Rigging

 


Search for (options)