Forums: Skydiving: Gear and Rigging:
Skyhook ?

 


swoopfly  (E License)

Sep 26, 2009, 9:19 AM
Post #1 of 130 (5035 views)
Shortcut
Skyhook ? Can't Post

hey


i always hear people brag about the new invention of the skyhook. i was wondering if there is a reason someone would not jump one? if you do not want a skyhook installed in your rig what would be your reason for that?


monkycndo  (D License)

Sep 26, 2009, 9:24 AM
Post #2 of 130 (5002 views)
Shortcut
Re: [swoopfly] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

It's good this question has finally been asked for the first time.Unsure

The search function is your friend.


councilman24  (D 8631)

Sep 26, 2009, 9:36 AM
Post #3 of 130 (4994 views)
Shortcut
Re: [swoopfly] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Go search,

But, it's only available on two brands of rigs. It adds complication. It helps in a few specific situations. It's expensive. It's still undergoing modification and updating, meaning I don't consider it mature.

Some of us don't promote it, yet.

The answer to thess?

It available on the best rigs on the market. (I disagree)
It doesn't add complication beyound what your rigger should be able to handle (KISS)
What's you life worth? (If it's worth that much don't skydive. It has arguably added complication to some incidents and behaps contributed to a fatality (So have all innovations))
All innovations undergo development. ( But I dont' want it to do it on my back.)


Lots will argu for it. Many of us don't believe it's a reason to pick a rig and might not get it anyway even if we choose a rig you can get it on.

For me, not worth the complication, cost, risk, and it's not on a rig I'd choose. There is another Main Assisted Reserve Deployment (MARD) device that is available to any manufacture to use without license fee. Non have implemented it so far.


NewGuy2005  (A 50256)

Sep 26, 2009, 9:42 AM
Post #4 of 130 (4993 views)
Shortcut
Re: [monkycndo] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
It's good this question has finally been asked for the first time.Unsure

The search function is your friend.

I don't disagree with your response, but I've got to say that it's high time to put "The search function is your friend" to rest.

That's got to be one of the most hackneyed phrases on this forum.

Tongue


monkycndo  (D License)

Sep 26, 2009, 10:13 AM
Post #5 of 130 (4983 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NewGuy2005] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

I don't disagree with your response, but I've got to say that it's high time to put "The search function is your friend" to rest.

That's got to be one of the most hackneyed phrases on this forum.

Tongue

You are right. It should be, "The search function is MY friend". That way if people actually used it, we would not get the same questions over and over and waste bandwidth. UnimpressedSmile


hookitt  (D License)

Sep 26, 2009, 11:47 AM
Post #6 of 130 (4957 views)
Shortcut
Re: [monkycndo] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

A good way to see if it has been talked about is doing a search. You may find the answer you're looking for. The search function is located <here> (in this case, upper right)

I agree with newguy. Wink

Edit to waste bandwidth. That's got to go too Laugh


(This post was edited by hookitt on Sep 26, 2009, 11:49 AM)


antonija

Sep 26, 2009, 12:06 PM
Post #7 of 130 (4942 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hookitt] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Can some1 please post links to the incident in which skyhook complicated things further? Just in rpocess of ordering new rig and I'm still not 100% on this one.


Andy9o8  (D License)

Sep 26, 2009, 6:23 PM
Post #8 of 130 (4851 views)
Shortcut
Re: [NewGuy2005] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I don't disagree with your response, but I've got to say that it's high time to put "The search function is your friend" to rest.
That's got to be one of the most hackneyed phrases on this forum.
Tongue

I'd vote for "Just my $.02" Or perhaps, "+1".
But I digress.


bigway

Sep 26, 2009, 8:28 PM
Post #9 of 130 (4798 views)
Shortcut
Re: [antonija] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Skyhook is the bees knees, the mutz nuts, the dogs bollocks. The skyhook is the shit!

A reserve over your head in 1.8 seconds? Holy Fuck!

I have ordered dozens of microns in the past few months with only 1 person opting to not go with the skyhook..

I think the video you are searching for is where the guys rig hits the wing of the cessna as he is on the strut and it pulls the bitch out. I dont think that is a skyhook issue, more of a guy maybe not use to getting out on the strut of a cessna and having his rig hit the wing above his back. (gear awareness, awareness of surroundings?) its not like the skyhoook jumped out of this container and latched on to the wing or door or whatever pulled it out.
Cant find the video but it is sure was one scary video, and not cause of the skyhook.


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Sep 26, 2009, 11:39 PM
Post #10 of 130 (4759 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bigway] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Cant find the video but it is sure was one scary video, and not cause of the skyhook.


It would not have happened without the skyhook which leads me to believe it was a skyhook related incident. In almost every case if something solves one problem it has the potential of creating different problem/s. Having crawled out on the wheel of a Cessna many times I know it is very easy to bump your rig against the wing or door.

Sparky


bigway

Sep 26, 2009, 11:50 PM
Post #11 of 130 (4745 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree, but now seeing it has happened the lesson should be learnt and solved.

'when climbing out on the wheel of a cessna be extra careful not to bump your rig on the wings if you have a skyhook, or just dont do it.'
Its not the skyhooks fault anymore, the jumper is now aware that extra attention and care is needed and is aware of the possible scenario.

Just as we learn from everything else that happens.

A HP canopy with a low turn can mean you are going to hit the ground hard, so we make sure we turn high enough. its no longer the canopies fault if we hit the ground hard, it is the jumpers fault.

With everything we buy in life we need to care for those things and be aware of the attention those items need. Obviously if you own a skyhook then you need to make sure you dont bump that rig on the wing of a plane above your head.

Camera guys make sure when they have a camera on their head they dont climb out and smack the camera on the wings, skyhook owners now have something to look out for.


It applies in so many situations, dont let your reserve handle catch on anything or it could kill you while climbing out of a plane.... dont let your skyhook catch on anything as climbing out of a plane as that too could kill you.


With everything new in life comes more ways we can kill ourselves, or more ways we can protect ourselves. There is a balance i believe.

I am also willing to bet that right after that incident happened Bill Booth would have been relevied he finally has something new to keep himself busy and invent a way for that to never be able to happen again.

Bill Booth is the mad genius of skydiving and his products are brilliant. I bow down to the man.


irishrigger  (D 297)

Sep 27, 2009, 1:27 AM
Post #12 of 130 (4737 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

It would not have happened without the skyhook which leads me to believe it was a skyhook related incident. In almost every case if something solves one problem it has the potential of creating different problem/s. Having crawled out on the wheel of a Cessna many times I know it is very easy to bump your rig against the wing or door.

I have to disagree with you sparky regarding this incident, it was not the skyhook that caused this incident, it was the RSL,to me there is a big difference between the 2.it was the RSL that was snagged on the door.not the skyhook itself,yes the lanyard is attached to the RSL,but that has nothing to do with it.
the question is would this incident have happend if that guy had NO RSL?
so does that mean we should all remove our RSL incase it gets snagged somewhere?
I will admit that i am a big supporter of the RSL and Skyhook,and so long as it is stored and secured correctly it should not cause a problem and is safe.
on that incident it look to me that the RSL was not tucked away correctly in the first place,it was sticking out and thats how it managed to get snagged.

just my 2 cents worth

rodger


antonija

Sep 27, 2009, 1:43 AM
Post #13 of 130 (4730 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

That video was RSL pulled out by door handle. That was jumper fault as he could have snagged reserve cable as well and have a really bad day with or without skyhook.

I would still like a link to an accident in which skyhook made things worse that they would be without skyhook. I keep hearing about "those" accidents but nooone seems to be able to provide me with a report or a video.


Beatnik  (D 1051)

Sep 27, 2009, 2:54 AM
Post #14 of 130 (4725 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bigway] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I am also willing to bet that right after that incident happened Bill Booth would have been relevied he finally has something new to keep himself busy and invent a way for that to never be able to happen again.

Bill Booth is the mad genius of skydiving and his products are brilliant. I bow down to the man.

Bill or his team of engineers that he has intellectual rights over


bigway

Sep 27, 2009, 4:47 AM
Post #15 of 130 (4706 views)
Shortcut
Re: [antonija] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Sorry but nobody here is actually saying these stories you 'keep hearing'. So unable to provide you with any videos to whatever stories you are hearing.

I would suggest you google the stories you keep hearing or maybe use the search function.

At the end of the day, if such videos are on this website, the person who shows them to you is going to have to use the search function to find them for you. Seems to me that is something you could do just as easily rather than have someone do your searching for you.


There is a link to the search function in the top right hand corner of every page in the forums. Just type in 'skyhook video' and see what comes up.


antonija

Sep 27, 2009, 5:25 AM
Post #16 of 130 (4695 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bigway] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

I did search this forum and I did found posts where people mentioned that skyhook _might_ cause line twist from spinning mal or cause entanglement with camera equipment.

Apart from this "might incidents" I have not been able to find one where it was decided that skyhook was the cause of the mal or has worsened it.

But I do appreciate the smartass "use search" reply... I know I use it a lot :p


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Sep 27, 2009, 5:31 AM
Post #17 of 130 (4695 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bigway] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile Hi

You should keep this forum clean & not calling any product or mfg. the way you named the system in your post.

If you do not like the system - just say that and / or give a PRO list of Pros & Cons.

The skyhook has nothing to do with the Cessna accident - the item should not be there at first time & the owner should take care his lanyard is well coverd & protected.

The system have a lot of PROS & it is easy to handle if you know your work as a rigger & you know the spec. The main issue is that there are riggers in the market who does not know the system - not on the Vector & not on the Javelin.

Like any system on the market they might be issues as well which might be discoverd with the time or during action & being solved / clean after that.

Some will point to NC Tandem fatality few month ago - it all started from the TI error /Very LOW altitude deployment of the main (around 2500')

I saw some Vector, Sigma, Javelin deployments with Skyhook & also with the Staging Loop / Split lanyard on the Vector / Sigma - NO issues - worked great.

Your opinion will be well respected all time it will be "mouth clean" & PRO.

Think about !!!


(This post was edited by RIGGER on Sep 27, 2009, 5:48 AM)


bigway

Sep 27, 2009, 6:12 AM
Post #18 of 130 (4679 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RIGGER] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Smile Hi

You should keep this forum clean & not calling any product or mfg. the way you named the system in your post.

If you do not like the system - just say that and / or give a PRO list of Pros & Cons.

The skyhook has nothing to do with the Cessna accident - the item should not be there at first time & the owner should take care his lanyard is well coverd & protected.

The system have a lot of PROS & it is easy to handle if you know your work as a rigger & you know the spec. The main issue is that there are riggers in the market who does not know the system - not on the Vector & not on the Javelin.

Like any system on the market they might be issues as well which might be discoverd with the time or during action & being solved / clean after that.

Some will point to NC Tandem fatality few month ago - it all started from the TI error /Very LOW altitude deployment of the main (around 2500')

I saw some Vector, Sigma, Javelin deployments with Skyhook & also with the Staging Loop / Split lanyard on the Vector / Sigma - NO issues - worked great.

Your opinion will be well respected all time it will be "mouth clean" & PRO.

Think about !!!


LMAO LMAO LMAO LaughLaughLaughLaugh

That was hillarious. Great post mate.

First of all, I make a living by selling skydiving products.
Secondly, the comments I made were compliments in slang.

I am not going to change who I am because I sell a product.

I am not American, we have different slang compliments than you guys do. For example, you go up to a girl where I come from and say "Hey Dog', you are going to get knocked out. Though in America you have some fat guys on a family tv show calling everyone a dog.

Bees Knees, Mutz Nuts, 'is the shit', are very high praising compliments outside of America.


Sorry you only read the first line of my post and jumped to conclusions.

Thanks for your concern though.


(This post was edited by bigway on Sep 27, 2009, 6:20 AM)


bigway

Sep 27, 2009, 6:15 AM
Post #19 of 130 (4677 views)
Shortcut
Re: [antonija] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

So whats stopping you from buying a Skyhook?

Not kidding you, I have so many people who have never wanted a RSL, now buying microns with skyhooks.
Have a look of the videos of these things in action.

if you cant find anything that says or shows you why you should not get one, then stop looking and go and buy one.


diablopilot  (D License)

Sep 27, 2009, 7:19 AM
Post #20 of 130 (4647 views)
Shortcut
Re: [swoopfly] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

It adds complexity to the system.

I jump video.

I don't like any of the rigs it's available on (except the Sigma).

I'm irritated by the hype. Tongue


antonija

Sep 27, 2009, 7:21 AM
Post #21 of 130 (4646 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
It adds complexity to the system.
So does AAD. And triring. And square chutes. But there are more pros than cons from these, I'd like to do the same for skyhook. So far it's more pros than cons.


diablopilot  (D License)

Sep 27, 2009, 7:24 AM
Post #22 of 130 (4645 views)
Shortcut
Re: [antonija] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

That's your opinion. I'd argue differently for most of the skydiving (other than tandems) that I do.


diablopilot  (D License)

Sep 27, 2009, 7:29 AM
Post #23 of 130 (4637 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bigway] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

What about the NC tandem fatality?

And they really are not that much faster than a standard reserve deployment, again...it's alot of hype.


diablopilot  (D License)

Sep 27, 2009, 7:32 AM
Post #24 of 130 (4632 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RIGGER] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

I love how you will ignore facts to suit your case.... so the incident may have started with a TI being low, but what would have happened if he HADN'T had a SKyHook on the rig?


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Sep 27, 2009, 7:59 AM
Post #25 of 130 (4612 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile Hi Dear friend

I do not ignore nothing - I do jump sigma with skyhook & staging loop / split RSL lanyard.

NC tandem fatality does started from TI error.

No one said that the Skyhook was the factor.

You can say the same on the AAD - no AAD no reserve container opened.

Each system has PRO & CONS - some will save you, some might put you in a corner.

Be Safe !!!


(This post was edited by RIGGER on Sep 27, 2009, 8:07 AM)


diablopilot  (D License)

Sep 27, 2009, 8:01 AM
Post #26 of 130 (1983 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RIGGER] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Before I answer the question, I'll put it to you again.... what would have happened after the TI pulled low, and scared his AAD if he had not had a SKyHook equipped rig?


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Sep 27, 2009, 8:05 AM
Post #27 of 130 (1981 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bigway] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile Hi

Thanks for making it more clear.

I did read your post not only the top lines.

Wink Slang around the world - all time no harm Smile

Cheers !!!


MakeItHappen

Sep 27, 2009, 9:17 AM
Post #28 of 130 (1960 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RIGGER] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
NC tandem fatality does started from TI error.

No one said that the Skyhook was the factor.

Actually, Shlomo, there are people that said the Skyhook was part of the problem.
If you read the documentation available from a FOIA request you'll see that the skyhook did play a part in that accident.
UPT added a hesitator to the deployment to alleviate a problem with the skyhook, but only on tandem rigs.

.


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Sep 27, 2009, 9:54 AM
Post #29 of 130 (1952 views)
Shortcut
Re: [irishrigger] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I have to disagree with you sparky regarding this incident, it was not the skyhook that caused this incident, it was the RSL,to me there is a big difference between the 2.it was the RSL that was snagged on the door.not the skyhook itself,yes the lanyard is attached to the RSL,but that has nothing to do with it.


I have not seen the video and was responding to a statement that the skyhook was activated by the jumper hitting his rig on the wing of the Cessna. If in fact it was a snagged RSL then that would be a different situation.

Sparky


Arvoitus  (D 3917)

Sep 28, 2009, 2:39 AM
Post #30 of 130 (1887 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
I have to disagree with you sparky regarding this incident, it was not the skyhook that caused this incident, it was the RSL,to me there is a big difference between the 2.it was the RSL that was snagged on the door.not the skyhook itself,yes the lanyard is attached to the RSL,but that has nothing to do with it.


I have not seen the video and was responding to a statement that the skyhook was activated by the jumper hitting his rig on the wing of the Cessna. If in fact it was a snagged RSL then that would be a different situation.

Sparky

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Bv_NqiT7pM


robskydiv  (D 26660)

Sep 28, 2009, 4:42 AM
Post #31 of 130 (1871 views)
Shortcut
Re: [swoopfly] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

I hope that Altico gets it. I'd love to have one in my Dolphin. Wink


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Sep 28, 2009, 10:07 AM
Post #32 of 130 (1818 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile Hi

What would not happened if he pulled at the right altitude ?

Cheers !!!


(This post was edited by RIGGER on Sep 28, 2009, 10:40 AM)


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Sep 28, 2009, 10:37 AM
Post #33 of 130 (1801 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MakeItHappen] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile Hi

No one = Official Report.

A lot was said about NC tandem fatality but there was not any clear point or clear saying that the skyhook was the factor of the main release.

It is very clear that the low altitude main deployment started the accident.

Yes, some people said the skyhook released the main by the falling free bag loading the "Collins Lanyard", does the cutaway cable trim was checked ?
does they know what the TI did ? I do not know.

Yes, the staging loop & the split RSL lanyard were added a time after the NC accident for the reason of eliminating the "it might happened".

The staging loop / split RSL lanyard are on all new Sigma & Vector h/c from UPT but the retrofit on Sigma & V3 working in the market is not mandatory.

As I said before each system has PRO & CONS.

Cheers !!!


(This post was edited by RIGGER on Sep 28, 2009, 10:42 AM)


diablopilot  (D License)

Sep 28, 2009, 10:41 AM
Post #34 of 130 (1797 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RIGGER] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Smile Hi

What would not happened if he pulled at the right altitude ?

Cheers !!!

What, are you on the payroll or something?

He would have landed uneventfully.

If he hadn't had a SkyHook, and he pulled low, he might of been able to land his main, he might have had a two out, and he might have still died, but for you to ignore the simple fact that a SkyHook GREATLY increases the complexity of the reserve system is irresponsible.


RIGGER  (D 7933)

Sep 28, 2009, 11:15 AM
Post #35 of 130 (1779 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Smile Hi Dear Friend

Who said for sure that the skyhook released his main ? it might be & it might not.

I do agree with you that the skyhook does add complexity to the reserve system - more detalis, more accurate spec. & the rigger & user must be aware of all the small details.

Same for the AAD in your system.

Please look at the PROS / SAVES & be aware of the risks - best way to deal with all is to stay within the limits = altitude watch & pull at time.

I saw some Sigma & V3 reserve deployments with skyhook & with staging loop / split RSL lanyard - worked great.

For any reason a skydiver goes low - close to the AAD firing zone - he should pull his reserve.

Be Safe !!!


(This post was edited by RIGGER on Sep 28, 2009, 11:19 AM)


dorbie

Sep 28, 2009, 4:39 PM
Post #36 of 130 (1742 views)
Shortcut
Re: [RIGGER] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

Who said for sure that the skyhook released his main ? it might be & it might not.

Seriously?

In reply to:
I saw some Sigma & V3 reserve deployments with skyhook & with staging loop / split RSL lanyard - worked great.

And why have they added these two modifications then?

It doesn't make much sense to deny contributing factors in an incident.


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Sep 28, 2009, 4:56 PM
Post #37 of 130 (1726 views)
Shortcut
Re: [swoopfly] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Here is my reason for not jumping it any more....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEau0dc67e4


Skydivesg  (D 10938)

Sep 28, 2009, 8:30 PM
Post #38 of 130 (1689 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

 I know this is off topic, but many people say that looking up and reaching for risers during the opening sequence invites off heading openings and line twists. Because most people don't do this very symetrically causing an unequal loading of the harness.

I would have to agree. I stopped that habit years ago and believe it has made a huge difference in my openings.

I now look at the horizon and work to keep my shoulders square. I also put my feet and knees together as I start getting pulled up to the vertical position. This allows the harness to get equal loading on both sides.

Just a thought.


antonija

Sep 28, 2009, 11:19 PM
Post #39 of 130 (1659 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Here is my reason for not jumping it any more....
The camera on your head or the linetwists?


USPA  (D 81812)

Sep 29, 2009, 2:09 AM
Post #40 of 130 (1645 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Strange, the Skyhook didn't work in your case. The main is long gone, and the bag is still around the reserve. Also you can see the pilot is extracting the bag, not the main.

Furthermore at line stretch the twist isn't there yet, it is started after canopy deployment.

Lastly, you do not arch (seen by the image of your lower body) and yet you want to delay your reserve deployment, for what?


(This post was edited by USPA on Sep 29, 2009, 2:11 AM)


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Sep 29, 2009, 3:00 AM
Post #41 of 130 (1649 views)
Shortcut
Re: [USPA] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Strange, the Skyhook didn't work in your case.

I dont have a dog in this fight and it doesnt matter to me one way or the other. But you need to look at the video again. At: 31 in the video you can clearly see the right riser attached to the reserve bridle. You can see the bridle forming a bite and both ends going back to the jumper. At :32 you can see 2 maybe 3 line twists in the reserve before full inflation. jmo

Sparky


USPA  (D 81812)

Sep 29, 2009, 4:27 AM
Post #42 of 130 (1630 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Didn't know it was a fight... :D

True, although the skyhook is attached, at 0:32 you can clearly see the pilot is deploying the reserve, not the main (/skyhook). This is the part which is strange, since the skyhook effectivly didn't work.

I personally like the slow-mo better, and by my judgement at 1.18 there doesn't seem to appear a twist yet, (especially when you look at where the twist later is)


irishrigger  (D 297)

Sep 29, 2009, 4:40 AM
Post #43 of 130 (1626 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Before I answer the question, I'll put it to you again.... what would have happened after the TI pulled low, and scared his AAD if he had not had a SKyHook equipped rig?

hi diablopilot,

i have to strongly disagree with your statement that you made.in my opinion,the skyhhook had nothing to do with this fatality what so ever! the skyhook never interfered with anything at all.
in my opinion the split lanyard might have contributed to the incident,disconnecting the left riser,the pull came form the wrong side as the reserve fell out of the tray.the skyhook did not open the reserve container,nor did the skyhook force the reserve free bag out of the container,it was gravity and a sudden and stop shock as the main inflated.
so in my opinion,the skyhook was not a contributing factor,but saying that,if the cutaway cable not going through the split lanyard,the main might have stayed connected and the out come could have been different and the TM could have dealt with that.

rodger


(This post was edited by irishrigger on Sep 29, 2009, 4:48 AM)


jcd11235  (D License)

Sep 29, 2009, 6:43 AM
Post #44 of 130 (1588 views)
Shortcut
Re: [USPA] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Didn't know it was a fight... :D

True, although the skyhook is attached, at 0:32 you can clearly see the pilot is deploying the reserve, not the main (/skyhook). This is the part which is strange, since the skyhook effectivly didn't work.

I personally like the slow-mo better, and by my judgement at 1.18 there doesn't seem to appear a twist yet, (especially when you look at where the twist later is)

I have to agree with mjosparky's observations. The reserve is deployed by the cutaway main, via the Skyhook, not by the reserve pilot chute. The reserve pilot chute still inflated because the jumper & parachute system were not static in the air. The line twists are clearly visible prior to reserve inflation. They are higher up in the lines during reserve deployment; inflation causes them to move down near the risers.


KellyF  (D 13826)

Sep 29, 2009, 8:55 AM
Post #45 of 130 (1551 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jcd11235] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

If you look at 1:17, you'll see the cutaway main canopy ~50 feet away from the jumper with no freebag of PC attached to it. If the Skyhook FINISHED the deployment, you should see the reserve in that shot. The Skyhook initiated deplyment by pulling the reserve pin, then either disconnected, or the lanyard broke because it couldn't pull the bagged reserve from between the jumper's head and right shoulder.

So the question I have is: was the lanyard found intact or broken?


jcd11235  (D License)

Sep 29, 2009, 9:09 AM
Post #46 of 130 (1537 views)
Shortcut
Re: [KellyF] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If you look at 1:17, you'll see the cutaway main canopy ~50 feet away from the jumper with no freebag of PC attached to it. If the Skyhook FINISHED the deployment, you should see the reserve in that shot.

I stand corrected.


sfgroschwitz  (D 30531)

Sep 29, 2009, 9:12 AM
Post #47 of 130 (1532 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Here is my reason for not jumping it any more....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEau0dc67e4

Disregarding for the moment whether or not the skyhook actually deployed the reserve (I couldn't tell from the video), are you saying that

a) the skyhook has a higher risk of creating line twist in the reserve when chopped spinning than a normal RSL?

b) the several hundred feet in altitude you might save with a skyhook as opposed to a normal RSL (or even no RSL) are always (or just in most situations) less advantageous to survival than avoiding the chance of line twist that's associated with it?

Edited for clarity


(This post was edited by sfgroschwitz on Sep 29, 2009, 9:16 AM)


hookitt  (D License)

Sep 29, 2009, 9:15 AM
Post #48 of 130 (1525 views)
Shortcut
Re: [jcd11235] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Nah. It was clearly not attached. It was not direct bagged by the main. Line stretch occurred because the pilot chute did what it was supposed to. In that video, the skyhook did not do what it was designed to.

The line twists occurred because the bag was pulled off the jumpers back while his back was toward the earth.


hookitt  (D License)

Sep 29, 2009, 9:26 AM
Post #49 of 130 (1508 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sfgroschwitz] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Disregarding for the moment whether or not the skyhook actually deployed the reserve (I couldn't tell from the video), are you saying that

a) the skyhook has a higher risk of creating line twist in the reserve when chopped spinning than a normal RSL?

b) the several hundred feet in altitude you might save with a skyhook as opposed to a normal RSL (or even no RSL) are always (or just in most situations) less advantageous to survival than the chance of line twist?

A) No. If it works as advertised, it has a lower chance of line twists than a standard RSL. If it works properly, it pulls the bag from the container before it can be influenced by the jumpers body.

B) Starting from a back to earth spiraling line twist, I still lose very little altitude and can pull my reserve ripcord face to earth in 1/2 to 1 second.

If you have an RSL You must ARCH when cutting away, not after, do it before or during the cutaway to help stop from doing a back roll.


diablopilot  (D License)

Sep 29, 2009, 11:41 AM
Post #50 of 130 (1458 views)
Shortcut
Re: [irishrigger] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Before I answer the question, I'll put it to you again.... what would have happened after the TI pulled low, and scared his AAD if he had not had a SKyHook equipped rig?

hi diablopilot,

i have to strongly disagree with your statement that you made.in my opinion,the skyhhook had nothing to do with this fatality what so ever! the skyhook never interfered with anything at all.
in my opinion the split lanyard might have contributed to the incident,disconnecting the left riser,the pull came form the wrong side as the reserve fell out of the tray.the skyhook did not open the reserve container,nor did the skyhook force the reserve free bag out of the container,it was gravity and a sudden and stop shock as the main inflated.
so in my opinion,the skyhook was not a contributing factor,but saying that,if the cutaway cable not going through the split lanyard,the main might have stayed connected and the out come could have been different and the TM could have dealt with that.

rodger

If not the bagged reserve falling out and through the SkyHook pulling on the Collins lanyard (only found on SkyHook equiped rigs) what are you supposing caused the one side riser to release?


beowulf  (C License)

Sep 29, 2009, 1:22 PM
Post #51 of 130 (1501 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Interesting video, not sure what exactly happened there. It sure doesn't look like the Skyhook pulled the reserve. The more I watch the video the more I wonder if the lanyard was even hooked up to the riser.

I had a similar malfunction two weekends ago. Only I wasn't on my back when I cut away. I have a very new Vector Micron with a Skyhook in it. I had no line twists at all under my reserve.


(This post was edited by beowulf on Sep 29, 2009, 1:31 PM)


airtwardo  (D License)

Sep 29, 2009, 1:57 PM
Post #52 of 130 (1478 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hookitt] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Nah. It was clearly not attached. It was not direct bagged by the main. Line stretch occurred because the pilot chute did what it was supposed to. In that video, the skyhook did not do what it was designed to.

The line twists occurred because the bag was pulled off the jumpers back while his back was toward the earth.

Yup, take a look at the difference between the risers as the reserve slider is coming down.

Unstable deployment caused the line twists.


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Sep 29, 2009, 2:38 PM
Post #53 of 130 (1461 views)
Shortcut
Re: [USPA] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Strange, the Skyhook didn't work in your case. The main is long gone, and the bag is still around the reserve. Also you can see the pilot is extracting the bag, not the main.

Furthermore at line stretch the twist isn't there yet, it is started after canopy deployment.

Lastly, you do not arch (seen by the image of your lower body) and yet you want to delay your reserve deployment, for what?

From what I understand on how the skyhook works. Is if there is more then 10 pounds of pressure it releases from the bridle.( not sure if thats the correct number or not. A rigger could answer it better) In my case thats what happened. From the spinning on my back. Skyhook released.

Thats why no RSL for me for now on. Cutaway roll over the deploy reserve.


beowulf  (C License)

Sep 29, 2009, 2:44 PM
Post #54 of 130 (1452 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In that case then the Skyhook did exactly what it should have done and disabled itself. You essentially had no RSL at all for that jump.
Or maybe I am reading this wrong?


(This post was edited by beowulf on Sep 29, 2009, 2:45 PM)


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Sep 29, 2009, 2:45 PM
Post #55 of 130 (1448 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Yea it did release but in the video on UPT's web site it shows someone on there back and it working. Take a look here
http://www.unitedparachutetechnologies.com/...;id=85&Itemid=70

In my case it didnt. Dont get me wrong I think its great in some cases like this dumb ass here
http://www.youtube.com/...&feature=related


(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Sep 29, 2009, 2:46 PM)


pchapman  (D 1014)

Sep 29, 2009, 3:00 PM
Post #56 of 130 (1430 views)
Shortcut
Re: [beowulf] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Interesting video, not sure what exactly happened there. It sure doesn't look like the Skyhook pulled the reserve. The more I watch the video the more I wonder if the lanyard was even hooked up to the riser.

The interpretation of the video is tough.
To deal with the sometimes awkward FLV format, I downloaded the video, converted it to another format, and viewed it frame by frame in Vegas.

Early on it isn't clear whether the Skyhook wasn't working at all, or perhaps it was working but only initially -- e.g., in some ways it appears at one point like the bridle goes up to a riser and then back out of sight to where the pilot chute would be, as in the attached screen grab.

The problem is that there is a lot of ghosting in the video, so one bridle often seems like two, presumably due to the de-interlacing done for the video on the web. Also, even in the attached photo, the main canopy and slider seem far away, and it isn't clear what is a riser and where the length of RSL to the Skyhook would be. One really has to look at other frames from the video.

Later, after the deployment sequence goes largely off screen and then back on, at that point the main seems far off and the pilot chute is seen pulling the freebag away.

In between the early and late parts of the deployment, there seems to be a lot of whipping of the reserve risers. That could be normal whipping around, as happens with lines before they are tensioned for a while. On the other hand, it also could point to a particular lack of tension between when the main canopy might be pulling the freebag, and when the p.c. is pulling the freebag.

So was the freebag detached from the main, what version of Skyhook was used, and was any of the red seal thread at the hook was still present, etc.??

I'm still really not sure what was going on in the video.


(This post was edited by pchapman on Sep 29, 2009, 3:02 PM)
Attachments: Clip0001.jpg (46.5 KB)


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Sep 29, 2009, 3:06 PM
Post #57 of 130 (1422 views)
Shortcut
Post deleted by ozzy13 [In reply to]

 


USPA  (D 81812)

Sep 29, 2009, 3:13 PM
Post #58 of 130 (1407 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Next time, whatever system you have on your back, Arch before you release... (arching after release is too late)


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Sep 29, 2009, 3:34 PM
Post #59 of 130 (1388 views)
Shortcut
Re: [USPA] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

I hear ya... It was my first spinner and I nearly crapped my pantsWink

I have talked to several riggers on this and the skyhook did what it was suppose to do. It pulled the pin then released because of the pressure.
Someone asked earlier in the thread if I rather not have a rsl and the answer is yes. I want to be able to get rid of my main get stable then pull the reserve. If I was low on that cutaway it would not of mattered if there was a rsl or not . With the rsl you see what happened and with no rsl who knows...

I want that choice.


USPA  (D 81812)

Sep 29, 2009, 3:36 PM
Post #60 of 130 (1383 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

I disagree on needing the choice, but that's an endless debate... (rec.skydiving flashbacks... :D ).

I jump RSL, Skyhook and disconnected RSL.


KellyF  (D 13826)

Sep 29, 2009, 3:37 PM
Post #61 of 130 (1388 views)
Shortcut
Re: [beowulf] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In that case then the Skyhook did exactly what it should have done and disabled itself. You essentially had no RSL at all for that jump.
Or maybe I am reading this wrong?
Actually, an RSL is exactly what he had on that jump- the pin got pulled by the departing canopy, just like the RSL's on any brand of rig on the market. What "failed" was the MARD (Main Assisted Reserve Deployment) portion of the system. We don't know how or why at this point, but I'm curious to find out.

It should take a couple hundred pounds of force in a straight line from the main canopy to the reserve bag to break the red lanyard (I don't know the exact figure off the top of my head). It will take up to 20 lbs. of force in a straight line from the pilot chute to the red lanyard to break the red seal thread holding the lanyard to the hook.

So something broke (more or less by design), was it the red seal thread at the hook, or the red lanyard on the RSL/Skyhook?


dorbie

Sep 29, 2009, 3:39 PM
Post #62 of 130 (1385 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In either case the guy is looking up at his main with his head way back over his reserve tray when he chops so the freebag goes bouncing over his shoulder past his head.

Great for video, maybe not so good for deployment, and another note to self about chopping.


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Sep 29, 2009, 3:59 PM
Post #63 of 130 (1365 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dorbie] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

lol I have to laugh at all the Monday quarterbacks. On that cutaway I felt the main come off my back funny. Thats why I looked up to see what was going on. As I did it started spinning. It was getting fast so instead of kicking out of it I cutaway. As I did that my head went low on release of the risers. Right shoulder was lower then left because of direction of spin. When reserve came out I was staring up at it because I was on my back. Line twist happened because of right shoulder being lower then left causing risers to be uneven hens the line twist. I dont know what released on the skyhook and never asked. All I know is I didn't like the situation I was in and would have rather cutaway then gotten stable to deploy my reserve.

Thanks for everyones input and I dont know if we will ever know what really happened....


(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Sep 29, 2009, 4:09 PM)


dorbie

Sep 29, 2009, 4:16 PM
Post #64 of 130 (1346 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
lol I have to laugh at all the Monday quarterbacks. On that cutaway I felt the main come off my back funny. Thats why I looked up to see what was going on. As I did it started spinning. It was getting fast so instead of kicking out of it I cutaway. As I did that my head went low on release of the risers. Right shoulder was lower then left because of direction of spin. When reserve came out I was staring up at it because I was on my back. Line twist happened because of right shoulder being lower then left causing risers to be uneven hens the line twist. I dont know what released on the skyhook and never asked. All I know is I didn't like the situation I was in and would have rather cutaway then gotten stable to deploy my reserve.

Thanks for everyones input and I dont know if we will ever know what really happened....

I wasn't trying to be critical, as I said "note to self". I could easily have done the same thing as you did in the video if you hadn't shared so thanks for sharing. It wasn't even on my radar as an issue.

No disrespect or discredit to you for saving your life.


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Sep 29, 2009, 4:18 PM
Post #65 of 130 (1342 views)
Shortcut
Re: [dorbie] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

sorry if i came off like a dickBlush Its all good


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Sep 29, 2009, 9:09 PM
Post #66 of 130 (1286 views)
Shortcut
Re: [USPA] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Didn't know it was a fight... :D

No fight, just a figure of speech. I was just stating what I took away from the video.

Sparky


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Sep 29, 2009, 9:11 PM
Post #67 of 130 (1284 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Yup, take a look at the difference between the risers as the reserve slider is coming down.

Unstable deployment caused the line twists.

Good catch Jim, I didn't even notice that.

Sparky


rickjump1  (C 1323)

Sep 30, 2009, 8:30 AM
Post #68 of 130 (1222 views)
Shortcut
Re: [beowulf] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Interesting video, not sure what exactly happened there. It sure doesn't look like the Skyhook pulled the reserve. The more I watch the video the more I wonder if the lanyard was even hooked up to the riser.

I had a similar malfunction two weekends ago. Only I wasn't on my back when I cut away. I have a very new Vector Micron with a Skyhook in it. I had no line twists at all under my reserve.
Skyhook worked for me last Sunday; no complaints.


erdnarob  (D 364)

Sep 30, 2009, 9:29 PM
Post #69 of 130 (1162 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

If you relate to the Vector III with Skyhook incident with a Cessna, well for me it is a Cessna door handle problem. It's the responsibility of the airplane owner to make sure the jump plane is fit for skydiving. If the door handle represented a possible catch for skydiving equipment, it should have been changed. My DZ uses Cessna airplanes and we make sure to put heavy tapes on any parts which can hook, cut or catch the jumper or/and his equipment. It is also the responsibility of the jumper to make sure his equipment has no protruding parts. Any rig could have been caught by this door handle like an exposed 3 ring cable metal housing, a tape across the reserve pin cover that people install to store their pilot chute, the reserve pin cover itself, a camera on the helmet...name it.


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Oct 1, 2009, 12:00 AM
Post #70 of 130 (1142 views)
Shortcut
Re: [erdnarob] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Any rig could have been caught by this door handle like an exposed 3 ring cable metal housing,

But it wasn't "any rig" it was a Vector III with a Skyhook.

It would be impossible to foresee every potential scenario when developing and testing a rig. As is often the case some situations are only discovered at the cost of a life. In this case a cheap price was paid to discover a potential problem. This would be a real good time to give it a look and maybe avert a more costly lesson. jmo

Sparky


irishrigger  (D 297)

Oct 1, 2009, 8:48 AM
Post #71 of 130 (1108 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

 
If not the bagged reserve falling out and through the SkyHook pulling on the Collins lanyard (only found on SkyHook equiped rigs) what are you supposing caused the one side riser to release?
sorry i can see your point know,i misread your origonal post.

rodger


diablopilot  (D License)

Oct 1, 2009, 10:52 AM
Post #72 of 130 (1083 views)
Shortcut
Re: [irishrigger] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

No worries, I missed the possibility in my initial examination of the SkyHook System it's self, however I still think it's a great addition to tandem skydiving.

I simply make the point that it adds a large amount of complexity to the system and it must alter the way one skydives if they choose to use one.


ikon

Oct 1, 2009, 12:32 PM
Post #73 of 130 (1024 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In your opinion then do you feel that a skyhook equipped rig is not ideal for someone's first rig? Being a student I've been doing lots of research on rigs beofre I buy one and I've been reading up on skyhook systems alot. Because of the complexity it adds is it more suited for experienced divers?


pilotdave  (D License)

Oct 1, 2009, 1:47 PM
Post #74 of 130 (1001 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ikon] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

diablopilot may (WILL) have a different answer, but I'd say a skyhook is perfectly suited for all experience levels. The complexity it adds is mainly for the rigger to worry about. You should understand how the system works and what its limitations are. But it does not generally change anything. Your emergency procedures stay exactly the same. But if your body position is imperfect when you cut away or you mess up and cut away lower than you should, the skyhook might make all the difference.

Dave


(This post was edited by pilotdave on Oct 1, 2009, 1:54 PM)


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Oct 1, 2009, 2:49 PM
Post #75 of 130 (980 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pilotdave] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
diablopilot may (WILL) have a different answer, but I'd say a skyhook is perfectly suited for all experience levels. The complexity it adds is mainly for the rigger to worry about. You should understand how the system works and what its limitations are. But it does not generally change anything. Your emergency procedures stay exactly the same. But if your body position is imperfect when you cut away or you mess up and cut away lower than you should, the skyhook might make all the difference.

Dave

Dave I would have to strongly disagree with your statement. As in a earlier post I show clearly that the skyhook was not the best thing in my situation. Also saying its your riggers problem to understand the omplexity it adds is just silly. You should know how the gear works that you are jumping Wink

It works great for students and Tandems.

As a first rig goes, I think It would be ok to have a skyhook in it. Just make sure you fully understand how it works. Just like everything out there, there are pros and cons.
Just my 2 centsCool


(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Oct 1, 2009, 2:52 PM)


beowulf  (C License)

Oct 1, 2009, 2:56 PM
Post #76 of 130 (1403 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

The skyhook wasn't a problem in your situation. If you had a plain old RSL you would most likely have had the same situation.

The skyhook didn't actually pull your reserve like it was designed to do. It reverted to RSL mode, as it was apparently designed to do.

The only problem you actually had was having to deploy your reserve on your back.


(This post was edited by beowulf on Oct 1, 2009, 2:58 PM)


pilotdave  (D License)

Oct 1, 2009, 3:07 PM
Post #77 of 130 (1391 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

I guess you didn't read "You should understand how the system works and what its limitations are." Tongue

I understand you're now suddenly opposed to RSLs because you got linetwists on your reserve. Not sure why you would specifically not recommend the skyhook though. Did anybody figure out why yours didn't work properly (but still worked as well as a regular RSL)?

You should know how the gear works that you are jumping. But even if you don't, how does having a skyhook change your skydive? Can you name some cons of the skyhook?

I highly recommend reviewing incident reports from the last few years. Compare the number of low cutaways (where an RSL/skyhook could have made a difference) and the number of deaths due to reserve linetwists. You're welcome to your own gear choices and opinions, but please base them on facts.

Dave


(This post was edited by pilotdave on Oct 1, 2009, 3:10 PM)


hookitt  (D License)

Oct 1, 2009, 3:48 PM
Post #78 of 130 (1373 views)
Shortcut
Re: [beowulf] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The skyhook didn't actually pull your reserve like it was designed to do. It reverted to RSL mode, as it was apparently designed to do.

But why did it use the design? It's a common cutaway scenario. Spiraling mains place the body inline with the main so it should have yanked the freebag out just fine.


Beatnik  (D 1051)

Oct 1, 2009, 3:56 PM
Post #79 of 130 (1368 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pilotdave] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
The complexity it adds is mainly for the rigger to worry about.

If you don't know how your gear works. You have no business jumping it. For most cases, your rigger isn't the one who is jumping it.


pilotdave  (D License)

Oct 1, 2009, 4:08 PM
Post #80 of 130 (1362 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Beatnik] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

If everybody knew as much about their gear as their rigger, we wouldn't need riggers. The skyhook adds complexity to packing the reserve, not to operating rig.

Dave


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Oct 1, 2009, 4:13 PM
Post #81 of 130 (1373 views)
Shortcut
Re: [erdnarob] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

>well for me it is a Cessna door handle problem. It's the responsibility of
>the airplane owner to make sure the jump plane is fit for skydiving.

Absolutely. And malfunctions are mainly a packer's problem; it's their responsibility to make sure the main is not packed so sloppily that it malfunctions. It's still a good idea to have a reserve.

Most fatalities in this sport are caused by several mistakes/screwups in a row. Eliminating as many as possible, and being able to deal with the rest, is the key.

>Any rig could have been caught by this door handle like an exposed 3 ring cable metal housing . . .

Right. But only a Skyhook might cut away one of the main risers if the RSL was pulled enough, which in this case would have been fatal.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Oct 1, 2009, 4:14 PM
Post #82 of 130 (1372 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pilotdave] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

>If everybody knew as much about their gear as their rigger, we wouldn't need riggers.

Sure we would. You can know more than your rigger about your gear, and it's still not legal to jump your rig unless he repacks it for you.


beowulf  (C License)

Oct 1, 2009, 4:19 PM
Post #83 of 130 (1363 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hookitt] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
The skyhook didn't actually pull your reserve like it was designed to do. It reverted to RSL mode, as it was apparently designed to do.

But why did it use the design? It's a common cutaway scenario. Spiraling mains place the body inline with the main so it should have yanked the freebag out just fine.


It's really hard to tell what exactly is going on by just looking at the video. But from what I could tell it looks like he is dearched and his body wasn't inline with the main. That's just my observations.

Like I said in an earlier post I had a similar malfunction and cut away with a Skyhook installed on my rig and I had a much different result.


irishrigger  (D 297)

Oct 1, 2009, 4:21 PM
Post #84 of 130 (1363 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pilotdave] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
If everybody knew as much about their gear as their rigger, we wouldn't need riggers. The skyhook adds complexity to packing the reserve, not to operating rig.

Dave

i have to say that i dont find it one bit complex to pack a reserve with skyhook,i think it is straight forward and easy,even if you have to read the manual.it is extremly simple in my eyes.however then again,you be amazed what some riggers can do.CrazyUnsurePirate

rodger


irishrigger  (D 297)

Oct 1, 2009, 4:36 PM
Post #85 of 130 (1355 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
No worries, I missed the possibility in my initial examination of the SkyHook System it's self, however I still think it's a great addition to tandem skydiving.

I simply make the point that it adds a large amount of complexity to the system and it must alter the way one skydives if they choose to use one.

actually, diablopilot, in that case that you described,with the weight of the reserve bag pulling on the cutaway cable,could that mean that if a person has a total malfunction,that it also would cutaway the left riser?would that be the same scenario?
i did a few unofficial drop tests after the incident here,we have over 30 rigs here with skyhook. i wanted to have a closer look,if i could recreate an unintensional cutaway.and i never once suceeded.the skyhook always disconnected before it released the left riser.
which leads me to believe that something else happend on that fatal jump that we dont know about.

rodger


irishrigger  (D 297)

Oct 1, 2009, 4:53 PM
Post #86 of 130 (1348 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pilotdave] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

 
Did anybody figure out why yours didn't work properly?


we had a simular situation here couple months ago,what i found when i got the free bag back,was that the seal tread that is supposed to keep the skyhook lanyard secure attached was very loose,and the landyard was able to slip off with out breaking the seal thread,so thats a possible scenario.

rodger


Beatnik  (D 1051)

Oct 1, 2009, 5:22 PM
Post #87 of 130 (1336 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pilotdave] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
If everybody knew as much about their gear as their rigger, we wouldn't need riggers.

I don't agree with this at. There are a lot of people that know more than their riggers and knowing the gear is not the only function of a rigger.

Whether it adds complexity of using it or not to me is not relevant. If you are going use and rely something to help safe your life, you should know how it works.


hookitt  (D License)

Oct 1, 2009, 5:26 PM
Post #88 of 130 (1336 views)
Shortcut
Re: [beowulf] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

I should say that my question isn't for my own knowledge. That spin wasn't that radical nor was his position so out of whack that it should fail.

The way I'm reading certain posts, in so many words, they state that it failed ... by design. Crazy.

Here's where my comment was leading. If it was set up correctly, I see no reason it should not have worked properly.


hookitt  (D License)

Oct 1, 2009, 5:30 PM
Post #89 of 130 (1327 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Beatnik] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

If you don't know how your gear works. You have no business jumping it. For most cases, your rigger isn't the one who is jumping it.

There goes a huge portion of the skydiving population. That includes people you jump with regularly.

Not saying I don't agree. That's simply the truth.


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Oct 1, 2009, 6:29 PM
Post #90 of 130 (1303 views)
Shortcut
Re: [beowulf] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The skyhook wasn't a problem in your situation. If you had a plain old RSL you would most likely have had the same situation.

The skyhook didn't actually pull your reserve like it was designed to do. It reverted to RSL mode, as it was apparently designed to do.

The only problem you actually had was having to deploy your reserve on your back.

You are100%correct and thats why I dont jump a RSL anymore.Wink


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Oct 1, 2009, 6:40 PM
Post #91 of 130 (1298 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pilotdave] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:


You should know how the gear works that you are jumping. But even if you don't, how does having a skyhook change your skydive? Can you name some cons of the skyhook?


Dave

I really don't anything against the skyhook per say. Just a RSL. Since the skyhook is one kind of rsl is the only reason I don't like it. If that makes any sence to you.

Cons of a rsl. Having to deploy my reserve on my back with my head low for startersWink
Having my main lines snag on my camera and having to worry about disconnecting the rsl before cutting away is another.
The skyhook is a great invention and design. It improved the RSL system dramatically.

I just dont like jumping a RSL after my experience


In reply to:
You're welcome to your own gear choices and opinions, but please base them on facts.

Dave


LOL I am basing them on facts... Did you watch the video Dave. No more RSL for me. Ill take my chancesWink


(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Oct 1, 2009, 6:46 PM)


pilotdave  (D License)

Oct 1, 2009, 6:51 PM
Post #92 of 130 (1285 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Beatnik] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
If you are going use and rely something to help safe your life, you should know how it works.

Which is basically what I said: "You should understand how the system works and what its limitations are."

But I was responding to diablopilot's comment: "I simply make the point that it adds a large amount of complexity to the system and it must alter the way one skydives if they choose to use one."

It is no more complex to jump a rig equipped with a skyhook than it is to jump a rig equipped with any RSL. Packing the reserve may be a different story. It may not be rocket science, but diablopilot believes the complexity is a major con of the system.

You don't need to spend a week with Dave DeWolf before you buy a Vector 3 or Javelin. You don't need to understand the closing order of the reserve container before you can take it up for a jump. Understanding what the colins lanyard does (and doesn't do) is important. Understanding the pros and cons of an RSL is important. Understanding the difference between an RSL and a skyhook is even more important. But understanding your gear to the same level as your rigger? GREAT! But also not realistic on day 1. You CAN (and most of us DO) jump gear that we don't know every detail about. You don't need a PhD on the Vector 3 (it rhymes!) to jump one. We learn about our gear over time.

Dave


sfgroschwitz  (D 30531)

Oct 1, 2009, 7:16 PM
Post #93 of 130 (1270 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

Dave I would have to strongly disagree with your statement. As in a earlier post I show clearly that the skyhook was not the best thing in my situation.

Hm. Didn't we conclude that in your case the skyhook didn't cause the line twist? If anything, your case would be an argument against not arching when cutting away using an RSL, or an RSL in general, but not at all specifically against a skyhook. Actually, it seems the skyhook did exactly what it was supposed to do, which is disable itself if there is more pull on the pilot chute.

Anyway... I just got a rig with a skyhook, after studying how it works (including the tandem incident) and concluding that in my case it offers far more advantage than possible disadvantage. I discussed it with riggers and jumpers I trust. And I have seen a few jumpers who had very strong opinions against any and all RSLs (the very manly "I want to get stable before I pull the reserve and don't need some cord to do it for me" crowd) see a skyhook in action change their minds and get one for themselves.

So yes, absolutely know your gear and study how it works, because just as that will help you use your gear right and deal with the 'what if's, it will also help you cut through people's opinions. And we all know it's skydiving, where everyone has one, even though mine is the only one that's ultimately right and perfectly reasoned ;)


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Oct 1, 2009, 7:18 PM
Post #94 of 130 (1267 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pilotdave] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Ok my understanding of both systems.

RSL uses the riser to pull your reserve pin.

Skyhook uses your main as a pilot chute for your reserve.

I don't see how the skyhook is a complex system.

Form what my rigger explained to me is that what ever catches more air will inflate the reserve. (pilot chute or the main)

Thats why in my case it looks like the lanyard was connected at first then it released. Idk if thats true or not but thats what I was told.

In any event the skyhook in not that complex. Its that people just don't educate themselves . I am included in that statement until my cutaway


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Oct 1, 2009, 7:22 PM
Post #95 of 130 (1257 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sfgroschwitz] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:

Dave I would have to strongly disagree with your statement. As in a earlier post I show clearly that the skyhook was not the best thing in my situation.

Hm. Didn't we conclude that in your case the skyhook didn't cause the line twist? If anything, your case would be an argument against not arching when cutting away using an RSL, or an RSL in general, but not at all specifically against a skyhook. Actually, it seems the skyhook did exactly what it was supposed to do, which is disable itself if there is more pull on the pilot chute.

)

ummm I have stated that its not the skyhook that i dont like .... Its a RSL in general Crazy

Im glad you got one and are not part of the crowd....

Ok i said my piece. Its all good and you are right. The only discussion anyone should make is what best for them.

Piece


(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Oct 1, 2009, 7:28 PM)


sfgroschwitz  (D 30531)

Oct 1, 2009, 7:57 PM
Post #96 of 130 (1241 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Dude, sorry if this came across as rude - first paragraph was addressed to you, second just a ramble, third to the OP. And I missed that you made the distinction between an RSL and the skyhook earlier, I only responded to the last post...

Soo...peace it is.


diablopilot  (D License)

Oct 1, 2009, 8:20 PM
Post #97 of 130 (1238 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pilotdave] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
But I was responding to diablopilot's comment: "I simply make the point that it adds a large amount of complexity to the system and it must alter the way one skydives if they choose to use one."

It is no more complex to jump a rig equipped with a skyhook than it is to jump a rig equipped with any RSL. Packing the reserve may be a different story. It may not be rocket science, but diablopilot believes the complexity is a major con of the system.

It may be no more complex to operate on a jump, but that does not mean it is not a more complex system, with more opportunities for failure. And my argument, is that no matter how much testing is done, a more complex system can have more risk of failure to operate as intended, or to be constructed or assembled incorrectly.

This said, I think it is a fabulous, however misunderstood, and sometimes misrepresented system.


USPA  (D 81812)

Oct 2, 2009, 12:26 AM
Post #98 of 130 (1210 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi Ozzy,

If your honest to yourself, would it have made any difference in your case?

You cutaway without arching and immediately pulled your reserve yourself.

Also in your case the skyhook functioned as a normal RSL, instead of a proper skyhook.

edited to add:
I missed an entire page of posts, before I made this reply.


(This post was edited by USPA on Oct 2, 2009, 12:37 AM)


hookitt  (D License)

Oct 2, 2009, 9:28 AM
Post #99 of 130 (1143 views)
Shortcut
Re: [USPA] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Hi Ozzy,

If your honest to yourself, would it have made any difference in your case?

You cutaway without arching and immediately pulled your reserve yourself.

Also in your case the skyhook functioned as a normal RSL, instead of a proper skyhook.

I'm not answering for ozzy, but this has been my experience with spinners pretty much identical to his. I do not have an RSL. It tossed me feet first and I 1/2 barrel rolled and pulled. It took less than 1 second to be on my belly (stable as far as the parachute is concerned) with the ripcord pulled and me still falling belly toward earth.

There is not enough wind to make the body right itself quickly by arching alone. After canopy release, it's all momentum and kinisthectic ability.

If you have an RSL, then arch hard. (this is one time when saying arch hard is appropriate). You may not go belly to earth if you're on your back but your body will resist flipping backward a bit more.

All that may seem obvious but since it's being discussed, those are some of my thoughts on it.


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Oct 2, 2009, 10:23 AM
Post #100 of 130 (1118 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

>RSL uses the riser to pull your reserve pin.
>Skyhook uses your main as a pilot chute for your reserve.
>I don't see how the skyhook is a complex system.

Because:

1) there are more parts to the system.

2) the skyhook also cuts away one riser as it activates. RSL's don't.

3) the skyhook must engage under certain circumstances and disengage under others. That is a much more complex function than an RSL which simply remains engaged under all conditions.

4) packing it requires more steps, more materials and more attention to placement of parts than an RSL does.


pilotdave  (D License)

Oct 2, 2009, 11:29 AM
Post #101 of 130 (1422 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hookitt] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
I'm not answering for ozzy, but this has been my experience with spinners pretty much identical to his.

Which is really where the skyhook has the advantage over a regular RSL or no RSL at all... when it works! I don't know why his skyhook disengaged in his cutaway and acted like a regular RSL, but if the skyhook feature had worked, it would have given him a much cleaner opening. Spinners under high performance mains are where the skyhook really shines. But of course it has to work.

Trying to get stable after cutting away has killed a lot of people that thought they could do a better job than an RSL.

Dave


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Oct 2, 2009, 12:16 PM
Post #102 of 130 (1403 views)
Shortcut
Re: [USPA] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Hi Ozzy,
Hi USPA

If your honest to yourself, would it have made any difference in your case? YES IT WOULD

You cutaway without arching and immediately pulled your reserve yourself. SO I SHOULD FOR LET THE RSL OR THE SKYHOOK TO PULL THE PIN FOR ME??? IS THAT WHAT YOU DO??? Crazy

Also in your case the skyhook functioned as a normal RSL, instead of a proper skyhook.WHY IS THAT BECAUSE I WASNT ARCHING AS YOU STATED... IN THE LINK BELOW UPT SHOWS THE SAME SITUATION AS MINE AND IT WORK FINE. SO IM THE RARE CASE???? OOPS edited to add in there video they were on there belly in the spinner.. I guess you were right the skyhook doesnt work if you dont arch Crazy
http://www.unitedparachutetechnologies.com/...;id=85&Itemid=70

I missed an entire page of posts, before I made this reply.You as well as a lot of other people...

Here is the video again
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEau0dc67e4

We can go back and forth for days on this. I was crapping in my pants to be honest with you. I probably could of kick out of the main if I triedWink But i didnt....Yes the skyhook worked as just a normal rsl in my case.. I would rather not have one now.. Nothing less, nothing more..Im done with this.. I spent enough time on it
Enjoy..Laugh


(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Oct 2, 2009, 2:37 PM)


riggerpaul  (D 28098)

Oct 2, 2009, 12:39 PM
Post #103 of 130 (1391 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

2) the skyhook also cuts away one riser as it activates. RSL's don't.

I have not seen one, but UPT tells me that the current generation Vector with non-Skyhook RSL has a Collins loop.

I was asking about what might be legal for a rigger to do or not do in the case that his Skyhook-equipped customer did not wish to use the Skyhook anymore.

They told me that, similar to the Sunpath postition, if the rig was built with a Skyhook or their RSL, you had to pack it that way. We are not allowed, for example, to leave the red lanyard off the hook. They also said that either the Skyhook or their current RSL includes a Collins loop, and it must be used.

Any change to the system would be considered an alteration, requiring a Master Rigger, manufacturer's approval, and logging it as an alteration.


councilman24  (D 8631)

Oct 2, 2009, 1:02 PM
Post #104 of 130 (1379 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Last I knew with the RSL, and I was envolved in discussion with Sunpath to get their language right but haven't looked at it in a couple of years, removing the RSL on a Javelin was an approved alteration but required a Master Rigger to do it and log it. It did not require separate approval by the Feds or the manufacturer.

Are you saying UPT requires separate approval for each removal?

You know what, I'm too out of date on this issue.Crazy Mainly because none of my customers HAVE a skyhook. Wink Of course these days most of my customers are pilots.


USPA  (D 81812)

Oct 2, 2009, 1:10 PM
Post #105 of 130 (1376 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

I agree,

Besides the AAD, the skyhook system is IMHO the most complicated piece of safety equipment out there.

In contract to that, I still like it...


riggerpaul  (D 28098)

Oct 2, 2009, 2:53 PM
Post #106 of 130 (1367 views)
Shortcut
Re: [councilman24] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Last I knew with the RSL, and I was envolved in discussion with Sunpath to get their language right but haven't looked at it in a couple of years, removing the RSL on a Javelin was an approved alteration but required a Master Rigger to do it and log it. It did not require separate approval by the Feds or the manufacturer.

Are you saying UPT requires separate approval for each removal?

You know what, I'm too out of date on this issue.Crazy Mainly because none of my customers HAVE a skyhook. Wink Of course these days most of my customers are pilots.

Hi Terry,

It all began when a customer asked me if his Skyhook-equipped rig could be packed as a more conventional RSL rig.

I told him is was certainly feasible, but I didn't know if it was legal, and that I would ask UPT. I figured that since it would still be a configuration that is available from the factory, it should not be a very big deal.

Just getting them to actually answer the question was like pulling teeth. After a bunch of email back and forth, I finally got an email with an answer.

Here is the salient part of the email.

Quote:
If the rig is equipped with it, it has to be packed with it. If you want to remove the Skyhook it has to be done by a Factory approved Master Rigger or equivalent, it the RSL is connected the Collins Lanyard has to be hooked up.

I don't believe they have a blanket approval in place, so according to 65.129(d) you need a specific approval from UPT.

65.129(d) No certificated parachute rigger may alter a parachute in a manner that is not specifically authorized by the Administrator or the manufacturer

And then there's the matter of what it takes to become a "Factory approved Master Rigger".

Now, maybe I am reading a bit much into an answer that they didn't seem to want to give in the first place.

But it sounds to me like they don't very much want to approve such an alteration.


(This post was edited by riggerpaul on Oct 2, 2009, 3:04 PM)


Para5-0  (D 19054)

Oct 2, 2009, 5:00 PM
Post #107 of 130 (1326 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Like a jackass I just wasted the better part of the evening reading this backwards, trying to figure out who was copying and pasting what. I now have a headache and really forgot what the hell you guys are talking about so thanks.


markovwgti  (D 29993)

Oct 2, 2009, 5:29 PM
Post #108 of 130 (1317 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

You could have saved all this arguing and commotion by kicking out of it! Tongue


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Oct 2, 2009, 5:54 PM
Post #109 of 130 (1308 views)
Shortcut
Re: [markovwgti] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
You could have saved all this arguing and commotion by kicking out of it! Tongue
Oh the infamous Marko that caused his own line twist at 1200 ft and if he didn't have a skyhook would probably be dead. Great commercial for UPT
Seen here
http://www.youtube.com/...&feature=related

Now this thread has gone full circle Wink


(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Oct 2, 2009, 6:02 PM)


riggerpaul  (D 28098)

Oct 2, 2009, 6:42 PM
Post #110 of 130 (1295 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Para5-0] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Here's the quick recap. Sorry your head hurts.

Billvon said "RSLs don't have Collins function".

I replied that I just learned that UPT RSLs now have Collins function.

The reason I found out was that I have a customer who asked me if I could disable the Skyhook and make it work like a regular (UPT) RSL.

In the process of getting that question answered, I learned that the current RSL on a new Vector has a Collins function.

I also learned that UPT would consider the change my customer asked about an alteration, and it would require approval and a Master Rigger to do it. (I was a bit surprised by this, since all you need to do to go from Skyhook to RSL is leave the red Skyhook lanyard off the hook.)

Councilman24 asked if UPT was requiring a separate approval for each instance of disabling the Skyhook.

I replied that since there is no blanket approval on file (like what Sunpath did for removing their RSL), I thought that a separate approval was required, and that it didn't look like UPT was much interested in approving such and alteration in the first place.

I haven't heard back from councilman24.

That brings you up to date.

Yes, it is a confusing stream-of-consciousness sort of discussion. But hey, it the web.

I hope your head feels better soon.

-paul


liftedtitan

Oct 3, 2009, 7:40 AM
Post #111 of 130 (1248 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Im just curious. If you happen to have an accidental reserve deployment that mal'd. like in the original video from the cesna. if he had knifed the reserve away before deploying his main, could the skyhook have cutaway just his right riser? Then he has nothing but a left riser to hang from.

im just wondering basically if the cutting of the right riser scares anyone.

i have no gripes either way, just wondering?


liftedtitan

Oct 3, 2009, 8:57 AM
Post #112 of 130 (1227 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
You could have saved all this arguing and commotion by kicking out of it! Tongue
Oh the infamous Marko that caused his own line twist at 1200 ft and if he didn't have a skyhook would probably be dead. Great commercial for UPT
Seen here
http://www.youtube.com/...&feature=related

Now this thread has gone full circle Wink

LMFAO! ownage right there.


ufk22  (D 16168)

Oct 3, 2009, 1:15 PM
Post #113 of 130 (1197 views)
Shortcut
Re: [liftedtitan] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Seems to be some misunderstanding of how the system works. I thought....
1. 10# load disconnect of the skyhook was only if the reserve was deployed without cutting away the main, allowing the reserve pilot chute to disconnect from the RSL, not something that would disconnect the skyhook under a cutaway situation
2. The skyhook cuts-away the left, not the right riser
3. Unless you have the OLD style RSL set-up, a premature reserve deployment won't cut-away either riser.
4. The skyhook adds no complexity to the user for maintanance or operation, other than the possible disconnection of the RSL for CRW, canopy wrap, or high wind landings.
5. The lack of function of the original posters system sounds more like a packing/rigger error than anything else. If properly set up, I don't think the skyhook could NOT stay on the pilot chute bridle of the reserve, even during a spinning deployment.
6. Suggesting to a low time jumper that they would be better off without the skyhook is like suggesting that they would be better off without an AAD. Granted, under the right circumstance, anything can fail, but there are a lot more Skyhook saves that Skyhook problems.
6.


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Oct 3, 2009, 6:32 PM
Post #114 of 130 (1170 views)
Shortcut
Re: [USPA] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Ok I found another video on utube with the same result as me.
http://www.youtube.com/...&feature=related

I dont like being the only one Tongue


liftedtitan

Oct 3, 2009, 8:52 PM
Post #115 of 130 (1138 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Ok I found another video on utube with the same result as me.
http://www.youtube.com/...&feature=related

I dont like being the only one Tongue

that dudes hand was almost wrapped in that!!! wow, he got line twists in his reserve just like you, kinda weird.


erdnarob  (D 364)

Oct 4, 2009, 6:41 PM
Post #116 of 130 (1059 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billvon] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

This is why I became a rigger, it was first to help myself. I started jumping in 1973 and became a rigger in 1977. No regret at all.


erdnarob  (D 364)

Oct 4, 2009, 6:56 PM
Post #117 of 130 (1054 views)
Shortcut
Re: [USPA] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

The Skyhook seems complex but it isn't. Seeing it working in both modes will convince a lot of people. Last year I had a demo of the Skyhook for the whole Summer. See the picture attached to this post. It has shown a lot of people that there was nothing to worry about. On the other hand your reserve will be open within 75 feet instead of 150-1200 feet as it could be seen on the Skyhook video.
I had 2 totals therefore I had to pull my reserve handle and the Skyhook was released automatically as it is designed to do so. The Collins on the Skyhook will make sure that when having an accidental release of the right riser (the one with the RSL) due to a broken riser or a 3 ring breakdown..., the left riser will be released preventing having an entanglement between the reserve and the main still attached to the left riser.
Attachments: SKYHOOK - copie.jpg (155 KB)


markovwgti  (D 29993)

Oct 5, 2009, 8:00 PM
Post #118 of 130 (965 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Ok I found another video on utube with the same result as me.
http://www.youtube.com/...&feature=related

I dont like being the only one Tongue


Well the difference here is he attempted to kick out of it....


Skydivesg  (D 10938)

Oct 6, 2009, 10:17 AM
Post #119 of 130 (904 views)
Shortcut
Re: [markovwgti] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

I'm just adding to the thread, not responding to the last post..............

I made a statement upthread (post 38) and these videos just prove my point.

That last video was a self induced spinner.

Stop looking up and grabbing risers during deployment. You will have fewer malfuntions.


Sobakin  (C License)

Oct 6, 2009, 11:59 AM
Post #120 of 130 (872 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Skydivesg] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
That last video was a self induced spinner.

Stop looking up and grabbing risers during deployment. You will have fewer malfuntions.
That was me, now I steering by rears while inflating, 90% onheading openings, more than 200 jumps w/o cutaway, but somtime it (Velo-79) still twists, but I untwist :)


riggerpaul  (D 28098)

Oct 6, 2009, 3:03 PM
Post #121 of 130 (827 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Last I knew with the RSL, and I was envolved in discussion with Sunpath to get their language right but haven't looked at it in a couple of years, removing the RSL on a Javelin was an approved alteration but required a Master Rigger to do it and log it. It did not require separate approval by the Feds or the manufacturer.

Are you saying UPT requires separate approval for each removal?

You know what, I'm too out of date on this issue.Crazy Mainly because none of my customers HAVE a skyhook. Wink Of course these days most of my customers are pilots.

Hi Terry,

It all began when a customer asked me if his Skyhook-equipped rig could be packed as a more conventional RSL rig.

I told him is was certainly feasible, but I didn't know if it was legal, and that I would ask UPT. I figured that since it would still be a configuration that is available from the factory, it should not be a very big deal.

Just getting them to actually answer the question was like pulling teeth. After a bunch of email back and forth, I finally got an email with an answer.

Here is the salient part of the email.

Quote:
If the rig is equipped with it, it has to be packed with it. If you want to remove the Skyhook it has to be done by a Factory approved Master Rigger or equivalent, it the RSL is connected the Collins Lanyard has to be hooked up.

I don't believe they have a blanket approval in place, so according to 65.129(d) you need a specific approval from UPT.

65.129(d) No certificated parachute rigger may alter a parachute in a manner that is not specifically authorized by the Administrator or the manufacturer

And then there's the matter of what it takes to become a "Factory approved Master Rigger".

Now, maybe I am reading a bit much into an answer that they didn't seem to want to give in the first place.

But it sounds to me like they don't very much want to approve such an alteration.

Boy, I am sorry to be the source of such confusing information.

UPT has recanted on the information they gave me and I posted here.

I got an email today that says:

Quote:
Sorry about the inaccurate information from the previous e-mail.

If you dont want the skyhook but you want the RSL we recommend that you remove the Hook from the bridle and the red lanyard, but since you have the RSL we recommend the use of the Collins Lanyard.

If you dont want the Collins Lanyard we recommend that you go to a straight pin and you remove the RSL completely from the system.

No mention of requiring a manufacturer's approval. No mention of requiring a Master Rigger.

(Please don't shoot the messanger.)


ozzy13  (D 29344)

Oct 6, 2009, 3:05 PM
Post #122 of 130 (826 views)
Shortcut
Re: [markovwgti] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
Ok I found another video on utube with the same result as me.
http://www.youtube.com/...&feature=related

I dont like being the only one Tongue


Well the difference here is he attempted to kick out of it....

No the difference is you are a retard and the skyhook saved your life!!!

Edited to add: No PA's here just facts


(This post was edited by ozzy13 on Oct 6, 2009, 3:14 PM)


Sobakin  (C License)

Oct 7, 2009, 4:27 AM
Post #123 of 130 (755 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Linetwist on high-loaded elliptical main canopy and linetwist on square reserve are not the same, on reserve you may not spinning to the ground, just fly forward and have time to untwist, but if You haven't this time, it means that skyhook saved your life, even with linetwist it's better, than with not deployed reserve.


markovwgti  (D 29993)

Oct 7, 2009, 10:03 AM
Post #124 of 130 (699 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ozzy13] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Ok I found another video on utube with the same result as me.
http://www.youtube.com/...&feature=related

I dont like being the only one Tongue


Well the difference here is he attempted to kick out of it....

No the difference is you are a retard and the skyhook saved your life!!!

Edited to add: No PA's here just facts




<3


USPA  (D 81812)

Oct 7, 2009, 11:14 AM
Post #125 of 130 (679 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Sobakin] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

So happy there are still logical thinking jumpers around...


councilman24  (D 8631)

Oct 7, 2009, 11:35 AM
Post #126 of 130 (677 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerpaul] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Well, they need to get their story straight. I may try to get them to make a public statement and policy like Sunpath in my capacity as PIA Rigging committee interim chair, but probably not before the next PIA meeting. (Or Bill if you read this give me a call.Wink)

One major difference. Vector is under TSO C23b. That standard did NOT include the RSL as part of the approved assembly. Neither did C23c. TSO C23d and the proposed PIA standard for C23e DO include the RSL and require testing with it IF so equipped. So, on a Vector the skyhook or RSL are not part of the approved assembly. It's not a main parachute either, that can only be altered by a Master Rigger. Looks to me more like an AAD, an unapproved appliance but NOT addressed in the FAR's. Seems to me like you could do what you wanted with it. Kind of like an altimeter hung on a chest strap.Angelic

I'm only mildly kidding. It's not part of the approved assembly, it's not part of a main parachute and it isn't addressed in the FAR's like an AAD or a static line assist. I'd suggest no regs apply to an RSL or MARD (main assisted reserve deployment) on a C23b or c rig.

Debate?


JerryBaumchen  (D 1543)

Oct 7, 2009, 3:28 PM
Post #127 of 130 (637 views)
Shortcut
Re: [councilman24] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi Terry,

I think you are starting to get this stuff. Tongue Tongue Wink

As with most things, the RSL req'ment has evolved over time:

C23(b) makes no mention of a RSL, static line or anything else of that nature.

C23(c) at Section 4.3.1 Ripcord Test says: ". . . If the ripcord is to be static line operated, the test shall be 2670 N (600 lbf) for not less than three seconds. . . "

C23(d) at Section 2.1.1 under Definitions says: "g. Primary actuation device (ripcord or functional equivalent, including reserve static line, if used)"

A personal thought: As I have stated before on this site; whenever one talks about a particular piece of parachute equipment it is ( IMO ) very important that one understands what version of the TSO standard that the equipment was certificated to.

Now, as to what C23(e) will have: Stay tuned, film at 11:00. Cool

Actually Terry, a very nice explanation.

JerryBaumchen


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Oct 7, 2009, 5:34 PM
Post #128 of 130 (613 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JerryBaumchen] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Now, as to what C23(e) will have: Stay tuned, film at 11:00.

Attached is the latest version I have seen.......but stand by for change 10 of 10,000.Tongue

Sparky
Attachments: ts-135.pdf (195 KB)


councilman24  (D 8631)

Oct 8, 2009, 6:13 AM
Post #129 of 130 (560 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

Way old sparky.Crazy

I'm on the committee writing it. It was last modified about 3 weeks ago. It was resubmitted to the FAA last week. I might suggest removing that version from the thread but that's up to you. There is a much newer version on PIA.com but I'm not sure it's the latest version. Haven't had a chance to compare it the version we voted to approve a couple of weeks ago.

edit I went and checked. The version at PIA.com is old. I'll get that removed or changed today. The lastest version is dated Sept 18, 2009 and AFAIK isn't public yet. If it is public well put it on PIA.com.


(This post was edited by councilman24 on Oct 8, 2009, 6:17 AM)


councilman24  (D 8631)

Oct 8, 2009, 7:10 AM
Post #130 of 130 (540 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JerryBaumchen] Skyhook ? [In reply to] Can't Post

But C23c doesn't specify the RSL as part of the approved assembly. Just alters the standard for the ripcord itself if one is used, recognizing that they exist. C23d, and future e does. So I call the cut off between RSL not approved and approved as c to d, not b to c.Angelic

As stated above we believe that PIA TS 135, the standard for C23e, is now finished. It's NOT on pia.com as of this posting. It should be soon.



Forums : Skydiving : Gear and Rigging

 


Search for (options)