Dec 4, 2012, 4:00 AM
Post #1 of 68
(5559 views)
Shortcut
Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
Can't Post
All Icon rigs from Aerodyne Research were recently grounded in Sweden (possibly all of the Nordic countries). The reason for this is that the reserve pilot chute failed to eject when the reserve was popped on the ground. The document (in Swedish) is attached. Rough translation:
Background A rig of the type Aerodyne Icon had the reserve popped during an ordinary service event [I'm guessing this means preparation for repack] by pulling th wire to the reserve pin. The spring pilot then stayed in the rig without releasing. Only by external influence, by pulling the lower flap of the reserve container, did the spring pilot jump from the container.
Coverage All rigs of the type Aerodyne Resarch Icon
Action Immediate grounding
When The grounding is effective immediately, and until further notice
Other info The grounding of Icon is done while we wait for the result of the investigation started by the manufacturer Aerodyne Research in order to establish the cause of what happened. The rig that experienced the issue will be sent to Aerodyne for inspection shortly. When the investigation is complete, a new evaluation of the Icon will be made. Aerodyne say they intend to proceed with the investigation as soon as possible.
---
Does anyone here know more about this? Did the incident in question happen in Sweden?
(This post was edited by slotperfect on Dec 6, 2012, 9:29 AM)
Dec 4, 2012, 4:14 AM
Post #2 of 68
(5541 views)
Shortcut
Re: [GalFisk] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I'd be interested to know if the rig in question was packed in accordance with the factory recommendations in terms of reserve side and closing loop length?
Given the variations in different reserve types, sizes, closing loop lengths, and rigger techniques, it would seem like a harsh reaction to ground all Icons based on a single event. Granted, it's a real 'deal breaker' of an event if it happens in freefall.
I agree, I'm just a regular jumper and therefore not really in the loop, but if I should get some more info I'll post it here. I don't know if there are any Swedish riggers or members of our Materials Committee on here.
Grounding feels appropriate until the cause has been found. This time of the year, most DZs are closed in Sweden (we have half a metre of snow, a temperature of -20-30°C and five hours of daylight), hopefully our championship contestants in Dubai are not adversely affected.
(This post was edited by GalFisk on Dec 4, 2012, 6:53 AM)
Dec 4, 2012, 12:07 PM
Post #7 of 68
(5032 views)
Shortcut
Re: [GalFisk] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Does anyone know what size of Icon it was I1, I2, I3, I...? Had the AAD cutter been relocated from under the pilotchute to above the pilotchute ? If this is the case, then it sounds a bit like the story we experienced some years ago in Belgium with the PdF small sized Atom harnesses where the pilotchute (type Quick 3.0) had a tendency to hook behind the AAD Cutter if relocated to above the pilotchute...
Dec 4, 2012, 1:05 PM
Post #8 of 68
(4927 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
At least they have someone who will ground them. Although there have been indications this may change for the last 13 years the FAA has been unwilling to issue airworthiness directives for parachutes. Last one was for the amp fittings on Vectors in 1999.
When I found a problem with Quasar's (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d39xqpKPX_w Ted Strong was quick to react but the service bulletin did not have the force of law. I expect there are still Quasar's with steel 'flingers' out there. I know other manufacturers have wanted AD's but were unable to get them because a parachute was no longer considered an appliance and only aircraft, engines, propellers and appliances could have AD's.
Other question, main in or main out? I know many riggers (most?) in the U.S. who routinely pull the main out before firing the reserve. Some changed their practice after seeing the above video.
Dec 4, 2012, 1:09 PM
Post #9 of 68
(4917 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Deyan] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
I would guess that the rig in question was made in 2010 or later....
What design changes did Aerodyne make then? I know they've tweaked the design in some ways (occasional bulletins attest to that) but don't know all the details.
EDIT: I've since heard that there were some changes to the reserve pin cover flap, possibly the length and/or stiffness, for at least some versions. Details unconfirmed.
(This post was edited by pchapman on Dec 4, 2012, 2:59 PM)
Dec 5, 2012, 9:54 AM
Post #11 of 68
(3999 views)
Shortcut
Re: [GalFisk] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I think this issue is the tip of a very nasty iceberg. The exception is the container that fails to open at all when the pin is pulled or the loop is cut and the Icon is not the only container this has been demonstrated on (Bad packing may contribute). What is more worrying is how much does the design of small modern containers slow down the reserve deployment. A hard deck of 750ft may be to late to start deploying the reserve. What every owner must start insisting on, is for the container manufacturer to state what the hard deck is for your container with your reserve. If he can't or won't tell you, go buy something else because, it either has not been tested or they already know it is to slow.
Just in case you don't know what a hard deck is. It is the lowest altitude above ground that you can expect your reserve to fully deploy and therefore save your life. Your decision height needs to be even higher. Ask yourself if you know the answer to this.
I can't say this strongly enough start asking and insist on an answer.
Dec 5, 2012, 5:29 PM
Post #12 of 68
(3810 views)
Shortcut
Re: [p.w.stockwell] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
What every owner must start insisting on, is for the container manufacturer to state what the hard deck is for your container with your reserve. If he can't or won't tell you, go buy something else because, it either has not been tested or they already know it is to slow.
You won't get an answer in the US, or really anywhere I would guess.
The problem is (and most likely what a manufacturer will tell you) is that the 'hard deck' is dependant on the body position, airspeed, reserve canopy, and pack job, and there's no way for them to quote you a number.
Those practical reasons aside, in the US you can add the problem of legal liability if you quote a hard number and the rig fails to meet that standard and it leads to an incident.
Judging by the customer provided video, it would appear and anomaly was produced from 2 contributing factors, one being an excessively long reserve closing loop and the other from initiating reserve deployment in an unconventional manor. After completing the 15 succsesfull test pulls we do not feel any corrective actions are nessessary.
Dec 6, 2012, 6:43 AM
Post #18 of 68
(3475 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wayneflorida] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
There is nothing to add to this thread. A lot of noise for nothing! It's just plain fuckin' stupid to ground a rig based on such a deployment with a too long closing loop. The guys involved in this issue should be grounded for a long time...
Dec 6, 2012, 6:59 AM
Post #22 of 68
(3450 views)
Shortcut
Re: [walstad] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
A few notes on Aerodyne's reply:
-- They partially fault "initiating reserve deployment in an unconventional manor" (sic). But it isn't clear whether the reserve was popped by pulling on the cable under the pin cover flap or not; they need to talk to the folks in Sweden more. The first frame of the video they received does show the rig on the ground and the pin in a person's hand, but it isn't clear what happened before that. Was the pin pulled manually with the rigger's hand perhaps against the top flap as Aerodyne suggests, or was the pin pulled the normal way, the pilot chute didn't launch, and then they put the rig on the floor and got out the camera?
-- They show the "excessively long" loop to be 7/8" above Aerodyne's specs. (But see my next point too! - it isn't that much.) But how much actual slack was there? That is, before pulling the pin, how much could a rigger compress the pilot chute and pull up excess loop? Plenty of rigs have loops that are above some manufacturer's spec, some of which are more realistic than others. The loop sounds longish but I wonder if that amount should be considered dangerous for an ideal rig.
-- Aerodyne claimed: "Typically, we would use a 115mm (4 ½”) with this combination." This specification is below any in the manual whether for a smaller, medium, or large size reserve. And the specs are shown only for Smart reserves. Looking in my Icon manual dated August 2011 (which is still current), it shows loop lengths of 12.0 to 14.0 cm for the Smart 150 to 175 reserve, in an Icon I5. Although the rig is an I5, we haven't been told what reserve was in use. If it isn't a Smart reserve, then there is no exact directive as to what the proper loop length will be. (The loop in the incident was 13.7 cm, within the range suggested for the rig, depending on reserve size.) So while the loop length may have been long in that it allowed for slack when packed, Aerodyne has done a very poor job in showing what length it should be according to the manual.
-- For the first time, we see that this was a case of popping the reserve with the main in place. The first photo in the pdf is a good example of how the main can interfere: The main side flaps just slightly overlap the stiff reserve bottom flap, making it harder to lift up. That flap in turn adds resistance to the reserve side flaps, which in turn resist the pilot chute.
At least Aerodyne attended to the matter quickly and tried a variety of tests, and had the pilot chute always fire. Although they got limited info from Sweden, both of their claims as to the cause of the problem are a bit weak. To summarize: a) it isn't clear if the reserve was activated the unconventional way they said b) it isn't clear how much slack there was in the loop, and their own claims on what the loop length should be do not match their own manual
Google translate of the Swedish portion is below. Pretty mangled though.
Is it saying the grounding is lifted or not?
Quote:
A rig type Aerodyne Icon was activated at regular service by wire to the spare pin was pulled. Spring pilot became prominent left in the rig without tripping. Only after the external influence by pulling reservcontainerns bottom flap, the pilot jumps out of the casing. Current controller packed system has followed Aerodyne Research Icon manual and the tolerances recommended therein.
Pending the outcome of the investigation that has been initiated by the manufacturer Aerodyne Research to determine the cause of the incident, all Aerodyne Research Icon been coated with hopes peak since 23 nov 2012th
The manufacturer has now taken his expected responsibilities and conducted an investigation. This shows that there is materielfel or defects, nothing in the report suggests that it would happen again. SFF Materials Committee renews hence its position.
Materials Committee finds EJ longer due to resume coat Aerodyne Research Icon with hopes peak.
scope All rigs of type Aerodyne Research Icon
measure Hope Top emphasized.
When from 2012-12-05
attachments Report from Aerodyne. (11_3_2012 Reserve Acuation Evaluation copy)
Other See Appendix for Aerodyne Research recommendations to the examiners for periodic maintenance and reserve activation.
(This post was edited by pchapman on Dec 6, 2012, 7:02 AM)
Dec 6, 2012, 7:02 AM
Post #23 of 68
(3439 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
You are absolutely correct and the reasons you have given add up to there being no performance standard to compare or for any container to have to meet. Hence your AAD may just be decoration as 750ft is just some number!!.
Of course we could say that the time for a pilot chute to clear the container can be measured. The extraction force required to lift the free bag out can be measured. If they can be measured a standard can be agreed. With these known factors a properly packed reserve can be expected to fully deploy in X seconds. from that you can work out what height you would need to be at if traveling at a given speed for the reserve to save you. PHeeew. Problem is no one is asking the questions (except me) and when an incident occurs it is to easy to just say the AAD didn't save them, even if it worked exactly as it was intended to.
Anyway if someone sells you something intended to do a job why shouldn't they be able to tell you the limits of its operating capability. eg minimum safe height to initiate reserve deployment. They do give the Maximum speed and weight on the reserve canopy after all..
Just to be clear this problem can apply to any small free-fly friendly container especially with four or more flaps covering the top of the reserve pilot chute.
Start Asking your container manufacturer ????
(This post was edited by p.w.stockwell on Dec 6, 2012, 7:11 AM)
Dec 6, 2012, 7:16 AM
Post #26 of 68
(1558 views)
Shortcut
Re: [p.w.stockwell] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
if someone sells you something intended to do a job why shouldn't they be able to tell you the limits of its operating capability. eg minimum safe height to initiate reserve deployment
Again, because factors outside of the manufacturers control will effect the performance of the rig.
Quote:
They do give the Maximum speed and weight on the reserve canopy after all..
Of course, becasue you can test for those things. You can push a weighed dummy out the back of a plane flying at a specific speed, and see the results.
Harness manufacturers can give you specs on the strength of the harness because that's easy to test. Strap a harness into a hydraulic pull tester, and see what it takes to rip it apart.
There are just too many variables to a reserve deployment to assign a hard number to it. Generally accepted practices in most of the word are that main deployment should be initiated by 2k ft at a minimum, and then EPs should follow immediately if need be.
If a jumper wants to push things to limit, they can dump at 2k and take their chances. If they want to add in some 'wiggle room', they'll initiate main deployment higher than 2k, and EPs immediately after if needed.
In terms of an AAD, they can all be adjusted to fire higher than the 750 ft default setting. The problem then is that you increase the risk of a two-out if your main snivels into your AAD firing altitude. If you did adjust your AAD, you would want to also 'adjust' your main deployment altitude up to match.
(This post was edited by davelepka on Dec 6, 2012, 7:18 AM)
Dec 6, 2012, 7:35 AM
Post #28 of 68
(1535 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Quote:
if someone sells you something intended to do a job why shouldn't they be able to tell you the limits of its operating capability. eg minimum safe height to initiate reserve deployment
Again, because factors outside of the manufacturers control will effect the performance of the rig.
Quote:
They do give the Maximum speed and weight on the reserve canopy after all..
Of course, becasue you can test for those things. You can push a weighed dummy out the back of a plane flying at a specific speed, and see the results.
Harness manufacturers can give you specs on the strength of the harness because that's easy to test. Strap a harness into a hydraulic pull tester, and see what it takes to rip it apart.
There are just too many variables to a reserve deployment to assign a hard number to it. Generally accepted practices in most of the word are that main deployment should be initiated by 2k ft at a minimum, and then EPs should follow immediately if need be.
If a jumper wants to push things to limit, they can dump at 2k and take their chances. If they want to add in some 'wiggle room', they'll initiate main deployment higher than 2k, and EPs immediately after if needed.
In terms of an AAD, they can all be adjusted to fire higher than the 750 ft default setting. The problem then is that you increase the risk of a two-out if your main snivels into your AAD firing altitude. If you did adjust your AAD, you would want to also 'adjust' your main deployment altitude up to match.
Hey thanks for your interest but I don't usually bother with forums because there is always someone who wants to just get into some sort of personal debate or argument and unless you work for a container manufacturer I don't see any reason for you to argue the other corner. My first post was deliberately worded as information encouraging people to start questioning and therefore learning about what they have just assumed. If the customers don't ask then container manufacturers will never bother. Please check out the PIA web site and the new additions to the TSO system TS118/112 this is the start of performance standards for containers and the use of AAD's.
By the way you cannot set the Hard deck on a Cypres, you can tell it lies about the altitude of your intended drop zone if you want. But the point is owners don't have the information anyway.
I don't want to be rude, but my efforts have been directed towards the Manufacturers and by being an active member of the UK riggers committee. I even spent two days in Germany recently to discuss some of these issues.with Airtec. We can all do our selves a favor by directing some of the energy spent on forum debate towards the Manufacturers themselves. Forums are great to share information and for support.
Dec 6, 2012, 8:33 AM
Post #29 of 68
(1488 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davelepka] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
There are just too many variables to a reserve deployment to assign a hard number to it.
This is not true. All of the variables may be established if you study the problem. If a rig is activated on the ground, on its front, laying on the pilot chute side, the pilot chute should throw the rig off of it. Any form of trapping the pilot chute is deadly. The MA-1 Spring has 28 pounds of force when compressed to within 1 inch. That much force, when released, should flip anything over which is properly designed. Additionally, no reserve container should require more than 18 pounds to extract the bag. If more than 18 pounds is required then a pilot chute with more effective drag surface than 6 sq. ft. must be used. I don't believe any are in service. One more thing: All manufacturers should identify the "Effective Size" of their pilot chutes as well as the extraction force. For more info see: http://www.jumpshack.com/...ds&SortBy=DATE_D Additionally see the video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4KArjdfBEA
Dec 6, 2012, 8:48 AM
Post #30 of 68
(1470 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DivingWombat] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
There is nothing to add to this thread. A lot of noise for nothing! It's just plain fuckin' stupid to ground a rig based on such a deployment with a too long closing loop. The guys involved in this issue should be grounded for a long time...
Hey there this is not a new problem it has been around and effects small containers designed for free-fly and extreme conditions manufactured 2003/2004 onwards. Only occasionally does a very obvious demonstration of this known issue occur. There have been fatality's because reserves didn't fully deploy before impact, in the last year, where the AAD fired at the correct height. If you had been involved for longer than a year you might realize how inappropriate your post is. Most people simply want to keep others alive by posting what is very important information. Oh and please don't swear it does nothing to support your point of view.
Dec 6, 2012, 9:05 AM
Post #31 of 68
(1455 views)
Shortcut
Re: Swedish Parachute Association lifts grounding on Icon containers
[In reply to]
Can't Post
On November 19, 2012, Aerodyne was notified of an instance where the reserve pilot chute didn’t clear the reserve container side flaps when the pin was pulled in preparation for a routine repack on an Icon. We requested the Icon be sent to us immediately for evaluation and the Swedish Parachute Association issued an immediate grounding of all Icon harness/container systems as a “safety first” measure.
A video was provided to us at that time showing the reserve deployment activation, from which the following were noted: 1. The Icon was not being worn during activation 2. The activation was not initiated by pulling the reserve handle
The rig arrived at Aerodyne on November 29, 2012 with the reserve packed and closed. The rig was then test pulled exactly as it arrived, using the reserve handle, with no hesitation from the reserve pilot chute. Subsequently, a total of 15 more test pulls were conducted in 3 different orientations of the rig (worn in upright position, worn in belly-to-earth position, on the floor not being worn) to see if any problems with the equipment could be detected. All 15 test pulls resulted in clear, unimpeded deployment of the reserve pilot chute from the reserve container.
The results of the tests and our observations from the customer’s video are as follows:
1. Pulling the cable next to the pin to release it from the loop as seen in the video interfered with the system’s normal activation 2. The reserve closing loop was too long, reducing the compression on the reserve pilot chute spring We have determined that these two factors combined with the fact that the rig was not worn contributed to the irregular deployment. 3.We have concluded that the equipment is working correctly and no corrective actions are needed.
Swedish officials agree with our conclusions and have lifted the grounding. Please see the attached announcement from the Swedish Parachute Association.
Dec 6, 2012, 9:52 AM
Post #33 of 68
(1386 views)
Shortcut
Re: [upndownshop] Swedish Parachute Association lifts grounding on Icon containers
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Does anyone else feel like me that a little time spent checking that report before it was released might have caught the spelling errors 'appers', 'returnd', 'expirianced', 'manor', 'successfull', 'nessessary', 'schedualed' that just make the report look rushed and sloppy and perhaps erode people's confidence in Aerodyne's attention to detail?!
Seems to me it's hard to fix something that's not really broke. Having a qualified rigger using the right loop appears to be the 'cure'...or did I miss something?
Dec 6, 2012, 12:17 PM
Post #35 of 68
(1260 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JohnSherman] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
All of the variables may be established if you study the problem
No, you can't. You have no way of knowing the airspeed or body position the jumper will be in. You don't know the size of the reserve, or how the bulk will be distributed. All of these things can have an effect on the time/altitude it will take to go from pulling the handle to the reserve slider coming down.
You did highlight some of the factors that you can measure, and manufacturers should measure these and use that info to design the 'best' rig they can, but it still doesn't add up to a reliable 'hard deck' for a reserve deployment in the real world.
Dec 6, 2012, 12:27 PM
Post #36 of 68
(1251 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JohnSherman] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
Additionally, no reserve container should require more than 18 pounds to extract the bag. If more than 18 pounds is required then a pilot chute with more effective drag surface than 6 sq. ft. must be used. I don't believe any are in service.
Does a Racer reserve pilot chute create 18 pounds of pressure at 15-20 MPH?
(This post was edited by divnswoop on Dec 6, 2012, 12:27 PM)
Seems to me it's hard to fix something that's not really broke. Having a qualified rigger using the right loop appears to be the 'cure'...or did I miss something?
That's the point they are not fixing it so lets hope its not broke. If you are interested in the bigger picture though read my previous posts.
By the way i love it when a big boy comes to my rescue. See the thread Cypress announces variable activation height. All you need to know now is what height do you need to set for your container and reserve combination. Start asking the manufacturers ???????. Why do you think Airtec have done this !!!!!!
Dec 6, 2012, 2:56 PM
Post #40 of 68
(1113 views)
Shortcut
Re: [p.w.stockwell] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
See the thread Cypress announces variable activation height. All you need to know now is what height do you need to set for your container and reserve combination. Start asking the manufacturers ???????. Why do you think Airtec have done this !!!!!!
To get themselves off the hook in the courtroom when somebody hit the ground with the freebag still in the container. They just want to give the responsibility to the jumper . That's all
Seems to me it's hard to fix something that's not really broke. Having a qualified rigger using the right loop appears to be the 'cure'...or did I miss something?
That's the point they are not fixing it so lets hope its not broke. If you are interested in the bigger picture though read my previous posts.
I don't understand what exactly they are supposed to fix?
They couldn't duplicate the reported problem when they received the rig in question...it worked even WITH the incorrect loop installed.
When they installed the correct length closing loop it also worked. . .how would you propose they 'fix' a system that works as designed??
I'm no rocket surgeon but prior to raising the panic flag were I the rigger reporting this I think I would have made sure all the components were to spec., that the thing was assembled correctly & the canopy was packed as directed.
If after doing all of that the problem was repeating, you obviously have a design situation...THEN make some notifications.
From what I see here...the incorrect loop was installed, the container was opened for an I&R in a way it wouldn't be in a real world application ~ not surprisingly there was an anomaly.
Looks to me like a rigger pointed a finger in the wrong direction...Had the system been packed in accordance with the manufactures instruction there would not have been an issue.
What's the fix to that other than retaining the rigger?
Dec 6, 2012, 4:07 PM
Post #43 of 68
(1073 views)
Shortcut
Re: [likestojump] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Can we please focus on the elephant in the room.
Where's the video of the "incident" that caused the grounding ?
I kinda doubt that will be released. If it was rigger in question who okay-ed the wrong closing loop, they probably wouldn't want a video record of a mistake in the public domain...the manufacturer probably doesn't want a video out showing the rig isn't idiot proof.
Dec 6, 2012, 5:03 PM
Post #44 of 68
(1035 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
Can we please focus on the elephant in the room.
Where's the video of the "incident" that caused the grounding ?
I kinda doubt that will be released. If it was rigger in question who okay-ed the wrong closing loop, they probably wouldn't want a video record of a mistake in the public domain...the manufacturer probably doesn't want a video out showing the rig isn't idiot proof.
Hey Jim,
I'm with Paul and John on this one. There is anecdotal evidence that some modern rigs aren't getting timely reserve deployments. From a statistical point of view, 15 test pulls is nothing and doesn't account for a number of variables.
A few examples. Sweden is a cold European country - what temperature was the rig at on the failed pull? Second question - a routine repack is after the rig has 'settled' for about 6 months (I don't know the Swedish repack cycle). There is a heck of a lot that may have caused the issue.
If the pack is so critical that a closing loop less than an inch too long causes a total mal, doesn't seem to be a robust design. I'd hope there is more margin and tolerance available on getting a reserve to launch.
The weirdest things can cause un-expected failures, and from an engineering point of view, I'd say you only understand the failure when you can recreate it.
(This post was edited by nigel99 on Dec 6, 2012, 6:45 PM)
Dec 6, 2012, 6:59 PM
Post #48 of 68
(973 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
Can we please focus on the elephant in the room.
Where's the video of the "incident" that caused the grounding ?
I kinda doubt that will be released. If it was rigger in question who okay-ed the wrong closing loop, they probably wouldn't want a video record of a mistake in the public domain...the manufacturer probably doesn't want a video out showing the rig isn't idiot proof.
Hey Jim,
I'm with Paul and John on this one. There is anecdotal evidence that some modern rigs aren't getting timely reserve deployments. From a statistical point of view 15 test pulls is nothing and also doesn't account for a vast number of variables.
Sweden is a cold European country - what temperature was the rig at on the failed pull? Second question - a routine repack is after the rig has 'settled' for about 6 months (I don't know the Swedish repack cycle). There is a heck of a lot that might have caused the issue.
If the pack is so critical that closing loop that is less than an inch too long causes a total mal, is that a robust design? I'd hope there is more margin and tolerance available on getting a reserve to launch.
The weirdest things can cause un-expected failures, and from an engineering point of view, I'd say you only understand the failure when you can recreate it.
Thing is Nigel, It's a popular rig used worldwide...are we seeing this problem anywhere else? Either through the static deployment for an I&R or in an actual emergency?
Certainly doesn't appear so.
From what was described and shown in stills...the pin was pulled by hand with the protective flap open and the riggers hand using the top flap for leverage to pull on the cable.
I don't jump one but isn't the top flap the last flap to close? If so wouldn't retarding it's movement tend to throw a monkey wrench in the works?
Add to that the longer than nominal closing loop which means the spring isn't compressed right - among other things...there's plenty wrong with that situation, but blaming the manufacturer???
I don't think so...
Yes there IS anecdotal evidence that some modern rigs aren't getting timely reserve deployments...however the basic design has to pass the TSO requirements which they do - so what is the 'end user' doing that's different than what the manufacturer did when it passed?
IMO tiny & tight is great for a wife but may not be the best choice for skydiving equipment.
In THIS case at least, the human factor is what caused the 'situation'.
~ Use the right closing loop, compress the reserve pilot-chute spring as it was intended to be...use the ripcord when pulling the pin and keep your hand from holding down the locking flap when ya pull in an emergency & all will be just ducky...trust me!
(This post was edited by airtwardo on Dec 6, 2012, 7:46 PM)
Dec 6, 2012, 7:27 PM
Post #50 of 68
(955 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
By the way the end user IS a major problem. I have no issue with the TSO testing.
When a rigger manages to get a reserve to not deploy it would be best if the manufacturer could replicate the failure. It can provide insight into what NOT to do, inform or change maintenance practise or simply show that a particular way of doing things is wrong.
I'm not sure that I agree with grounding equipment, based on speculation though. There are too many variables and taking the 'conservative' approach can seriously damage a business.
Dec 6, 2012, 7:33 PM
Post #51 of 68
(1722 views)
Shortcut
Re: [nigel99] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
By the way the end user IS a major problem. I have no issue with the TSO testing.
When a rigger manages to get a reserve to not deploy it would be best if the manufacturer could replicate the failure. It can provide insight into what NOT to do, inform or change maintenance practise or simply show that a particular way of doing things is wrong.
I'm not sure that I agree with grounding equipment, based on speculation though. There are too many variables and taking the 'conservative' approach can seriously damage a business.
Agreed 100%
I can fabricate plenty of pictures of shit supposedly not working. I hope those pictures alone won't be enough to convince the manufacturers or various parachuting associations of the products' lack of airworthiness.
Dec 6, 2012, 9:06 PM
Post #52 of 68
(1694 views)
Shortcut
Re: Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
From what was described and shown in stills...the pin was pulled by hand with the protective flap open and the riggers hand using the top flap for leverage to pull on the cable.
Well that's what Aerodyne is saying based apparently on the video, but it isn't clear whether that is true. The first frame of the video given to Aerodyne shows someone holding the pin end of the ripcord.
I don't know why Aerodyne assumes only that that's how the reserve was popped. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't; one can invent scenarios for both.
If the rigger did pull the pin out from the pin end, while pressing down on the rig, that could indeed let the pilot chute start to expand only slowly, making it easier for friction of all the flaps to hang it up.
As for the rig not being worn, OK, that does affect geometry. But does one want a rig where the company says that the reserve does "table total" occasionally?
And to reiterate from a prior post, since we don't know what the reserve canopy is or how much slack there really was in the loop, I'm not sure we can say that the closing loop was terribly long. Longer than ideal, sure, but how much is unclear. I also don't want to have a rig where it table totals because of a half inch too long loop.
The Icon is probably no worse than other rigs, but Aerodyne's response could have been much more convincing.
Dec 7, 2012, 12:55 AM
Post #53 of 68
(1645 views)
Shortcut
Re: [likestojump] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I have pulled a couple Reserves like that and even might have my hand ont he top flap, but the pilot chute still launched out no matter what, or what rig! and looking at the pics i would def expect the RPC to clear those flaps even at that stage.
I would disagree with nigel, i would also have grounded all rigs immediatley.call me old fashioned but better safe than sorry in my opinion. I dont know the expierience level of the rigger involved, but in my opinion he made the right call. he was unsure of what happend and asked for help with this matter and got the right people involved.
however my main concern is that the launch of a RPC could greatly be reduced if the incorrect lenght loop is used. there has been several discussion on here about that with different rigs,end result the reserve container flaps not opening or severly restricted and slowed down. the report says this loop was 7/8 to long, which to me,is not really that excessive! i have packed some rigs using a 3.5-4" loop. and after 6 months that this loop had stretched out. so in my opinion this is the real safety issue that needs to be looked at and addressed immediatley. manufactures and the industry should come together to see what can be done about it. if a loop that is slightly to long can reduce dramaticly the effectiveness of a RPC surely that is a MAJOR Problem???
the longest loop i have replaced was when i inspect a vector rig from an arriving visitor. i immediatley noticed that the RPC was def not seated correctly and i could compress it a huge amount. i explained it to the jumper and replaced the reserve closing loop for him which was a staggering 8.5" it had a seal on it but i was unable to identify the rigger involved. however the RPC on the vector still did its job.( it was a big boy RIG)
Dec 7, 2012, 4:01 AM
Post #54 of 68
(1597 views)
Shortcut
Re: [irishrigger] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
the report says this loop was 7/8 to long
a) As I pointed out, that's based on a factory statement about the correct loop length is 1/2 cm shorter than the shortest listed in the manual for three different sizes of reserve in the manual (which vary in a range of 2 cm).
b) Therefore Aerodyne is saying that the loop is too long compared to their own secret knowledge of the correct length.
c) It supposes that there is zero variation in allowed loop length. If Mr. Factory Rigger in Florida says "3 inches" is normal for a particular rig, am I a bad rigger if I use a 3 1/4" loop in winter in dry air where I am?
d) As you pointed out, a little slack has always been considered acceptable after being packed a long time. (Although having much slack is now less common with small rigs and leverage devices to make rigs super tight.)
It would all be easier if they just said that with the rig packed, they could push down on and compress the pilot chute and pull the pin & loop up an extra X" of slack, whatever that number might be.
Dec 7, 2012, 8:38 AM
Post #55 of 68
(1497 views)
Shortcut
Re: [wayneflorida] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
An RSL activation of the reserve does not use the reserve handle but pulls the cable just above the pin, we acknowledge that the rigger`s hand in this instance may have restricted the opening sequence, however the handle is not always the way a reserve is opened.
All being said, the rig was not on someone at activation which it would need to be in a real scenario or realistic test.
Quick, prompt and concise response from the manufacturer - Have a great evening all. Peace
Dec 7, 2012, 9:31 AM
Post #57 of 68
(1461 views)
Shortcut
Re: [BlondeBarbie] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
An RSL activation of the reserve does not use the reserve handle but pulls the cable just above the pin, we acknowledge that the rigger`s hand in this instance may have restricted the opening sequence, however the handle is not always the way a reserve is open
What you are missing here is that to have the reserve pin pulled from the RSL, the main have to be out first. Here the big part of the problem is the main being still in the rig.
Dec 7, 2012, 9:42 AM
Post #58 of 68
(1453 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
the report says this loop was 7/8 to long
a) As I pointed out, that's based on a factory statement about the correct loop length is 1/2 cm shorter than the shortest listed in the manual for three different sizes of reserve in the manual (which vary in a range of 2 cm).
b) Therefore Aerodyne is saying that the loop is too long compared to their own secret knowledge of the correct length.
c) It supposes that there is zero variation in allowed loop length. If Mr. Factory Rigger in Florida says "3 inches" is normal for a particular rig, am I a bad rigger if I use a 3 1/4" loop in winter in dry air where I am?
d) As you pointed out, a little slack has always been considered acceptable after being packed a long time. (Although having much slack is now less common with small rigs and leverage devices to make rigs super tight.)
It would all be easier if they just said that with the rig packed, they could push down on and compress the pilot chute and pull the pin & loop up an extra X" of slack, whatever that number might be.
+1
I would like to see one more piece of information included in all deployment tests... the pull force. I have seen several rigs (some from manufacturers that push maximum closing loop lengths) that have come in with ripcord pull forces in excess of 22-lbs. Highest was ~40+lbs, packed by the factory, tested while worn and adjusted correctly.
Ok, Aerodyne says all is well when using the correct (apparently shorter than manual) length loop, but was the pull force acceptable with that loop? NOT saying it wasn't, but based on what I've seen come in, I'd like to know...
JW
PS (edited to add) I have no insight to this particular issue, nor Aerodyne's tests and have not personally seen one of their rigs pull hard.
(This post was edited by fcajump on Dec 7, 2012, 10:17 AM)
Dec 7, 2012, 10:03 AM
Post #59 of 68
(1437 views)
Shortcut
Re: [fcajump] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
the report says this loop was 7/8 to long
a) As I pointed out, that's based on a factory statement about the correct loop length is 1/2 cm shorter than the shortest listed in the manual for three different sizes of reserve in the manual (which vary in a range of 2 cm).
b) Therefore Aerodyne is saying that the loop is too long compared to their own secret knowledge of the correct length.
c) It supposes that there is zero variation in allowed loop length. If Mr. Factory Rigger in Florida says "3 inches" is normal for a particular rig, am I a bad rigger if I use a 3 1/4" loop in winter in dry air where I am?
d) As you pointed out, a little slack has always been considered acceptable after being packed a long time. (Although having much slack is now less common with small rigs and leverage devices to make rigs super tight.)
It would all be easier if they just said that with the rig packed, they could push down on and compress the pilot chute and pull the pin & loop up an extra X" of slack, whatever that number might be.
+1
I would like to see one more piece of information included in all deployment tests... the pull force. I have seen several rigs (some from manufacturers that push maximum closing loop lengths) that have come in with ripcord pull forces in excess of 22-lbs. Highest was ~40+lbs, packed by the factory, tested while worn and adjusted correctly.
Ok, Aerodyne says all is well when using the correct (apparently shorter than manual) length loop, but was the pull force acceptable with that loop? NOT saying it wasn't, but based on what I've seen come in, I'd like to know...
JW
That would be interesting...to see the results of BOTH loop lengths.
Dec 9, 2012, 5:30 PM
Post #60 of 68
(1266 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Just to state the obvious in answer to some of the points people have raised. The most well known recognized test is the TSO and the rig is not on someones back for those tests.
The manufacturer has not been able to replicate the malfunction and therefore has not explained it. A theory is nothing more than a theory until it is proved.
The manufacturer has not recommended any action to avoid the same problem occurring again. Other than correct length closing loop. But as they couldn't replicate the problem with an over length loop that would appear to indicate the loop didn't cause the issue.
This is not the first time this has happened by any means there have been a number of incidents involving several manufacturers so the problem is well known and over length loops do appear to contribute. This is just the latest example that the problem is still around.
But ask yourself this if a container tested to the TSO requirements can fail to open when opened by the method designed to open it. e.g. pulling the pin. Will it work when opened by an AAD that has not been tested at all as part of the TSO. When a container is opened by the AAD, which is also an unconventional method, the container does not have to meet any standard for performance. Add the extra piece of string left in the grommets when the AAD fires and it sure is not going to help the container to open. So when your AAD tries to save you at 780 ft cuts the loop and nothing happens its to late.
Now is the time to ask the manufacturers what the hard deck is for your container when it is opened by the AAD or the pin?????.
The previous poster's assumption that Airtec have introduced the ability to set the hard deck so they can blame the jumper is a bit ridiculous. I think its more likely they know some containers take to long to deploy.
Dec 9, 2012, 6:56 PM
Post #61 of 68
(1235 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
) As I pointed out, that's based on a factory statement about the correct loop length is 1/2 cm shorter than the shortest listed in the manual for three different sizes of reserve in the manual (which vary in a range of 2 cm).
b) Therefore Aerodyne is saying that the loop is too long compared to their own secret knowledge of the correct length.
c) It supposes that there is zero variation in allowed loop length. If Mr. Factory Rigger in Florida says "3 inches" is normal for a particular rig, am I a bad rigger if I use a 3 1/4" loop in winter in dry air where I am?
d) As you pointed out, a little slack has always been considered acceptable after being packed a long time. (Although having much slack is now less common with small rigs and leverage devices to make rigs super tight.)
It would all be easier if they just said that with the rig packed, they could push down on and compress the pilot chute and pull the pin & loop up an extra X" of slack, whatever that number might be.
+1 from here too.
Am I the only one that sees what's going on here?
- Stiffened side flaps + a large pilot chute cap (it's sides within an inch of the sidewalls and main/reserve dividing wall) means that the pilot chute top cap is pushing with it's edges against the furthest end of the opening (the hinge side of the flap).
It's the same thing as trying to push a door open by it's hinge side - it requires a lot of force.
The pilot chute slowly pushes the "hinge" sides until the top cap "hits" the stiffeners, and there you have it - Total Malfunction.
This is a design problem on almost all small-sized rigs with fully concealed reserve pilot chutes that are available today.
I can think of 3 solutions to this problem:
1. A smaller pilot chute cap (would punch the center instead of the hinge side of the flaps) 2. Less stiffening of the flaps, and (dare I say the next one?) 3. An externally mounted pilot chute
Dec 9, 2012, 7:33 PM
Post #62 of 68
(1219 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Deci] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Quote:
) As I pointed out, that's based on a factory statement about the correct loop length is 1/2 cm shorter than the shortest listed in the manual for three different sizes of reserve in the manual (which vary in a range of 2 cm).
b) Therefore Aerodyne is saying that the loop is too long compared to their own secret knowledge of the correct length.
c) It supposes that there is zero variation in allowed loop length. If Mr. Factory Rigger in Florida says "3 inches" is normal for a particular rig, am I a bad rigger if I use a 3 1/4" loop in winter in dry air where I am?
d) As you pointed out, a little slack has always been considered acceptable after being packed a long time. (Although having much slack is now less common with small rigs and leverage devices to make rigs super tight.)
It would all be easier if they just said that with the rig packed, they could push down on and compress the pilot chute and pull the pin & loop up an extra X" of slack, whatever that number might be.
+1 from here too.
Am I the only one that sees what's going on here?
- Stiffened side flaps + a large pilot chute cap (it's sides within an inch of the sidewalls and main/reserve dividing wall) means that the pilot chute top cap is pushing with it's edges against the furthest end of the opening (the hinge side of the flap).
It's the same thing as trying to push a door open by it's hinge side - it requires a lot of force.
The pilot chute slowly pushes the "hinge" sides until the top cap "hits" the stiffeners, and there you have it - Total Malfunction.
This is a design problem on almost all small-sized rigs with fully concealed reserve pilot chutes that are available today.
I can think of 3 solutions to this problem:
1. A smaller pilot chute cap (would punch the center instead of the hinge side of the flaps) 2. Less stiffening of the flaps, and (dare I say the next one?) 3. An externally mounted pilot chute
I see the problem ~ No Jesus string on the top flap!
Dec 10, 2012, 11:30 AM
Post #63 of 68
(1100 views)
Shortcut
Re: [p.w.stockwell] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
The previous poster's assumption that Airtec have introduced the ability to set the hard deck so they can blame the jumper is a bit ridiculous. I think its more likely they know some containers take to long to deploy.
Why do you think that it's an assumption? And I never said that Airtec wants to blame the jumper. What I said that they don't want to be sued when their unit did its job, but someone else's product failed.... For you might be a ridiculous reason, but Airtec had to spend money in the past to defend themselves in the court , so I guess they know better.
And of course they are aware of the problem with some containers. USPA is aware of the problem as well. Even the container manufacturers are aware of the problem with their rigs, but as long as the TSO is valid and people are buying the rigs, there's no reason for change.
Someone might argue that there's no problem at all since it happens once-twice per year over some million jumps all over the world and statistically they will be right. What about that?!
Dec 10, 2012, 12:55 PM
Post #64 of 68
(1066 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Deyan] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted (See Post #31)
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
The previous poster's assumption that Airtec have introduced the ability to set the hard deck so they can blame the jumper is a bit ridiculous. I think its more likely they know some containers take to long to deploy.
Why do you think that it's an assumption? And I never said that Airtec wants to blame the jumper. What I said that they don't want to be sued when their unit did its job, but someone else's product failed.... For you might be a ridiculous reason, but Airtec had to spend money in the past to defend themselves in the court , so I guess they know better.
And of course they are aware of the problem with some containers. USPA is aware of the problem as well. Even the container manufacturers are aware of the problem with their rigs, but as long as the TSO is valid and people are buying the rigs, there's no reason for change.
Someone might argue that there's no problem at all since it happens once-twice per year over some million jumps all over the world and statistically they will be right. What about that?!
What you actually said was
"To get themselves off the hook in the courtroom when somebody hit the ground with the free-bag still in the container. They just want to give the responsibility to the jumper . That's all"
You very clearly say they want to give the responsibility to the jumper. You didn't say anything about being sued. Nor did you mention anyone Else's product failing.
I see now maybe what you meant is
"To get themselves of the hook in the courtroom when somebody hit the ground with the free bag in the container because the free-bag stayed in the container even though the AAD had fired at the set altitude."
Its just not what you said.
You are correct that the Manufacturers see no reason to change things. Unless you as customers start asking relevant question. If enough people ask and the answers get circulated people may start to choose equipment based on its performance and reliability. manufacturers would have to fall in line with those that can give the answers or loose their market position. But I am stating the obvious. Ask your container manufacturer what the Hard deck is for your container reserve combination. What is the drag factor for your Reserve pilot chute Etc.
As I said before I don't usually post on forums because its to easy to get suckered into these rather pointless misdirected debates. Use a bit more time tackling the manufacturers
(This post was edited by p.w.stockwell on Dec 10, 2012, 1:07 PM)
Dec 10, 2012, 3:37 PM
Post #65 of 68
(1010 views)
Shortcut
Re: Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted
[In reply to]
Can't Post
A little bit of an update:
I got in touch with a senior person at Aerodyne. Although their public statement left too much out in my opinion, which attracted my criticism, they do have some additional information.
-- The reserve was a Smart 160, a perfect size for the Icon I5.
-- They have since tested with someone pushing down a moderate amount on the top flap, but haven't been able to lock up the pilot chute that way.
-- The reserve loop lengths suggested in the manual could use some updating and they'll look at that.
-- When that particular rig was closed, a rigger could push down hard on the pilot chute and pull up with a bar and pullup cord, and get 7/8" of slack in the reserve loop. So there was indeed a lot more slack than one normally expects.
-- Aerodyne didn't just blame the rigger and wash their hands of it all when the statement was issued. They're still interested in more evaluation & testing, despite not being able to replicate the issue so far.
Dec 12, 2012, 2:52 AM
Post #66 of 68
(834 views)
Shortcut
Re: [pchapman] Icon rigs grounded in Sweden Lifted
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
A little bit of an update:
I got in touch with a senior person at Aerodyne. Although their public statement left too much out in my opinion, which attracted my criticism, they do have some additional information.
-- The reserve was a Smart 160, a perfect size for the Icon I5.
-- They have since tested with someone pushing down a moderate amount on the top flap, but haven't been able to lock up the pilot chute that way.
-- The reserve loop lengths suggested in the manual could use some updating and they'll look at that.
-- When that particular rig was closed, a rigger could push down hard on the pilot chute and pull up with a bar and pullup cord, and get 7/8" of slack in the reserve loop. So there was indeed a lot more slack than one normally expects.
-- Aerodyne didn't just blame the rigger and wash their hands of it all when the statement was issued. They're still interested in more evaluation & testing, despite not being able to replicate the issue so far.
That's good. Unfortunately one thing that's very hard to replicate is that little bit of extra resistance added to everything just because it has been closed for months and everything is bedded in and settled. Even the flap fabric will stretch and take on a slight set shape over time. Perhaps its time to introduce a standard method of opening reserves for repack to try and identify this type of issue on containers that have been closed for months and maybe measure extraction force while we are at it.
M-varning_2012-4.pdf
What every owner must start insisting on, is for the container manufacturer to state what the hard deck is for your container with your reserve. If he can't or won't tell you, go buy something else because, it either has not been tested or they already know it is to slow. 
SwedishIconTestReportReview.jpg
