Dec 17, 2007, 10:22 AM
Post #1 of 18
(1522 views)
Shortcut
180 cycle decision has NOT been made!
Can't Post
I've been informed that at least one rigger, and probably many other uses, believe that the repack cycle for emergency and reserve parachutes in the U.S. has been changed to 180 days. IT HAS NOT.
No decision has yet been published by the FAA. They have 18 months from the closing of the comment period on the PROPOSED RULE to make a final decision. Until they do so, publish it, and we understand the effective date, the inspection cycle is STILL 120 DAYS.
If you can't convince someone of this ask them to show you the published rule and changed FAR's.
Dec 18, 2007, 4:58 AM
Post #7 of 18
(1104 views)
Shortcut
Re: [councilman24] 180 cycle decision has NOT been made!
[In reply to]
Can't Post
UK is still 6 months but in Spain apparently its now 1 year !!! It would be nice to have some uniformity cos having maybe for you guys and gals depending on how often you jump 3 reserve repacks a year is not only expensive but shortens your reserve life comparitive to a UK jumper and now especially a Spanish jumper. Hope you get your 180 at least.
Dec 18, 2007, 6:33 AM
Post #9 of 18
(1073 views)
Shortcut
Re: [councilman24] 180 cycle decision has NOT been made!
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
I've been informed that at least one rigger, and probably many other uses, believe that the repack cycle for emergency and reserve parachutes in the U.S. has been changed to 180 days. IT HAS NOT.
How about now?
billvon (D 16479)
Moderator
Dec 18, 2007, 9:18 AM
Post #10 of 18
(1007 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisL] 180 cycle decision has NOT been made!
[In reply to]
Can't Post
> Does this mean that it looks like it actually is going to change . . .
The comment period has ended, so they will review the comments and decide whether or not it makes sense to implement the change. Generally a NPRM means they are quite serious about the proposed change.
Dec 18, 2007, 9:25 AM
Post #11 of 18
(1000 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ChrisL] 180 cycle decision has NOT been made!
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I would characterize it this way. The FAA decided that it may be a resonable change based on the wavier application. They issued the NPRM to get comments from the community. They got those. They have to rebut each negative comment individually. There are some legitamit reasons to stay at 120. The split proposal 120/180 makes some sense too. The fact that the NPRM was published doesn't make it a done deal eventually and doesn't mean they can't rewrite the rule change.
There are many people envolved that believe it will change to 180 days. The sceptic in me says it's a toss up. About equal numbers of professional riggers supported it as opposed it.
Dec 18, 2007, 10:12 AM
Post #12 of 18
(977 views)
Shortcut
Re: [rehmwa] 180 cycle decision has NOT been made!
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
In reply to:
IT HAS NOT.
How about now?
Are we there yet, are we there yet...
Thanks for the update Terry.
I've got pilots that are almost accusing me of hiding the change from them (as though it was already in place)... I keep telling them "you've delt with the FAA... you tell me how fast they are to make things easier...??"
Personally I'm fine with 180 as long as they don't all want them on the same day.
Dec 18, 2007, 11:07 AM
Post #13 of 18
(954 views)
Shortcut
Re: [fcajump] 180 cycle decision has NOT been made!
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
I've got pilots that are almost accusing me of hiding the change from them (as though it was already in place)...
Sh*t!!!
I haven't meet a pilot yet that gets his bail-out rig repaced every 120 days let alone would ever 180.
Tell them to quit their bitchin' and call up the local FSDO and ask if its 120 or 180 days? I'd be stunned if anyone there knew on the spot and didn't have to go look it up... that's if they even picked up the phone in the first place.
Dec 18, 2007, 11:16 AM
Post #14 of 18
(945 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] 180 cycle decision has NOT been made!
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Quote:
I've got pilots that are almost accusing me of hiding the change from them (as though it was already in place)...
Sh*t!!!
I haven't meet a pilot yet that gets his bail-out rig repaced every 120 days let alone would ever 180.
Most of mine do, but they're involved in a weekly airshow with a Fed on the field EVERY week.
The down side is that the show goes 6 mo... means EVERYONE will want their rig packed the week before the season so as to last through the end of the season (~180 days later)... I think I will start charging premium for that week.
Dec 18, 2007, 2:51 PM
Post #15 of 18
(876 views)
Shortcut
Re: [councilman24] 180 cycle decision has NOT been made!
[In reply to]
Can't Post
And these are the same people some want to turn over USPA regulations and ratings to? I hope we are done evolving as a sport and are willing to live with things as they are now.
Dec 19, 2007, 6:22 AM
Post #16 of 18
(784 views)
Shortcut
Re: [fcajump] 180 cycle decision has NOT been made!
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Quote:
...I think I will start charging premium for that week...
A lot of riggers I know are already saying they are going to nearly double their price ($50ish to $80ish) for a reserve repack if the cycle goes to 180 days. So, it wouldn't be like you'd be the only one out there doing that.
Dec 19, 2007, 6:56 AM
Post #17 of 18
(773 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ZigZagMarquis] 180 cycle decision has NOT been made!
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Quote:
...I think I will start charging premium for that week...
A lot of riggers I know are already saying they are going to nearly double their price ($50ish to $80ish) for a reserve repack if the cycle goes to 180 days. So, it wouldn't be like you'd be the only one out there doing that.
I will likely do so in '08 regardless, but then I haven't raised my core prices since 1999.
I don't rig FOR the money, but its starting to cost me more money and time than its been worth... (OK, it always was...)
Dec 19, 2007, 8:06 AM
Post #18 of 18
(757 views)
Shortcut
Re: [diablopilot] 180 cycle decision has NOT been made!
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Quote:
Welcome to the Federal Government. Have a seat and we'll call your number....
I know this is off subject but its amazing how fast they act if they get paid enough!
Except for the recent change to the mandatory retirement age for air carrier pilots to 65. The House passed it last monday, the Senate on Tuesday, the President on Wednesday, effectively immediately! Talk about a screw job!
