Forums: Skydiving: Gear and Rigging:
Is this really safe?

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All

frontloop33

Feb 22, 2011, 7:27 AM
Post #1 of 78 (2037 views)
Shortcut
Is this really safe? Can't Post

Hi!

a friend of mine just told me, that he ordered a new rig with a 130 sqft reserve parachute (main: 170 sqft).


Thing is, he only has about 50 jumps on a civilian parachute and about 100 military jumps (that round parachute). And his exit-weight should be near the maximum allowed weight for this reserve!

Do you think it is safe / ok to jump a 130 sqft reserve with so little experience? And what do you think about the dealer, who sells that?


(This post was edited by frontloop33 on Feb 22, 2011, 7:39 AM)


DocPop  (C License)

Feb 22, 2011, 8:15 AM
Post #2 of 78 (1976 views)
Shortcut
Re: [frontloop33] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

It is outside the recommendations, but beyond that, without knowing WL or skill level I won't comment any further.

What seems strange to me is why someone who wants to jump a 170 as a main would feel OK downsizing 40 sq ft in an emergency. I don;t understand that logic.


frontloop33

Feb 22, 2011, 8:21 AM
Post #3 of 78 (1966 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DocPop] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

I don't understand that either.

Wingload should be around 1.05 for the main and 1.4 for the reserve.
Skill level: as mentioned. Just licensed for civilian jumping and some military jumps (T10).


(This post was edited by frontloop33 on Feb 22, 2011, 8:23 AM)


DocPop  (C License)

Feb 22, 2011, 8:36 AM
Post #4 of 78 (1942 views)
Shortcut
Re: [frontloop33] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

I think it is safe to say that military round jumps will offer nothing to canopy control on a ram air reserve (except the ability to do a good PLF).

My opinion is that this is a bad decision, and I just hope it is not the first in a chain of events that results in a post in the incidents forum.

Did your friend make this decision because he "got a deal" on this container/reserve combo?

Finally, I believe it is illegal in the USA to jump a reserve loaded at 1.4 or higher unless you have 500+ jumps or a signed waiver in the logbook from an instructor.


(This post was edited by DocPop on Feb 22, 2011, 8:39 AM)


davjohns  (B 36948)

Feb 22, 2011, 8:36 AM
Post #5 of 78 (1942 views)
Shortcut
Re: [frontloop33] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

You really had to ask?

When I first started, I asked why reserves were so often smaller than mains. I was told it was for appearance / convenience.

Someone put it in persepective by saying, "Nobody ever went to silver and subsequently looked up to think 'I wish that was smaller'."


bofh  (D 13995)

Feb 22, 2011, 8:50 AM
Post #6 of 78 (1931 views)
Shortcut
Re: [davjohns] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Someone put it in persepective by saying, "Nobody ever went to silver and subsequently looked up to think 'I wish that was smaller'."

I though I should have gotten a 139 instead of the 149 when I first used my Icarus reserve.


DocPop  (C License)

Feb 22, 2011, 8:52 AM
Post #7 of 78 (1930 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bofh] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:

I though I should have gotten a 139 instead of the 149 when I first used my Icarus reserve.

Why?


JohnRich  (D License)

Feb 22, 2011, 8:58 AM
Post #8 of 78 (1919 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DocPop] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
It is outside the recommendations, but beyond that, without knowing WL or skill level I won't comment any further.

What seems strange to me is why someone who wants to jump a 170 as a main would feel OK downsizing 40 sq ft in an emergency. I don;t understand that logic.

I believe it is illegal in the USA to jump a reserve loaded at 1.4 or higher unless you have 500+ jumps or a signed waiver in the logbook from an instructor.

If you don't know the wing-loading, then how can you say it's outside the recommendations?

It is NOT illegal to jump a reserve loaded at 1.4 or higher. It might be contrary to the BSR's, but it's not against the law. You can legally jump a handkerchief if you want.


DocPop  (C License)

Feb 22, 2011, 9:01 AM
Post #9 of 78 (1916 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JohnRich] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

John - I was referring to Brian Germain's recommendations on canopy size/jump #s.

As far as the illegal aspect is concerned, the following is from the PD Reserve manual (my bolding):

Quote:

WING LOADINGS ABOVE 1.4 LBS/SQ.FT, AND BELOW THE MAXIMUM SUSPENDED WEIGHT:

This is a very high wing loading. Turn rates, forward speed and rates of descent will all be very high.
A very high experience level is required to get an acceptable landing, even under ideal landing conditions.
Control range may be very short, with stalls happening very abruptly, with little warning. This situation
can be very dangerous. Performance Designs advises all jumpers, regardless of experience, that it
is safer to choose a lower wing loading than this level. However, Performance Designs recognizes that
there are a few individuals that have a great deal of experience and skill flying a main parachutes in this
wing loading, and are determined to use reserves in the same wing loading. While this is legal (if the
conditions below are met)
, it is very hazardous. There are relatively few jumpers that are capable of
handling this situation. At a minimum, jumpers must meet the follow requirements:

- At least 500 ram-air canopy jumps and at least 100 jumps on a ram-air canopy that is no more
than 15% larger than the reserve parachute

-or-

- Have an endorsement in their log book from an instructor who has the proper ratings issued to
them by their countries governing association stating that:
The jumper has been given instruction in high wing loading canopies.
The maximum wing loading the individual has demonstrated that they can safely
handle.
The wing loading for the reserve parachute must not exceed the maximum demonstrated wing loading

These are both FAA (USA) and Performance Designs requirements that must be met for you to be
legal
. Other countries throughout the world may also enforce these limitations. Even if you meet the
level requirements this is a very dangerous situation. The landing conditions, weather, or your skill level
may make this even more dangerous. Severe injury or death may result. Also keep in mind that if you
are rendered unconscious and an AAD opens your reserve, it is very likely that you may suffer severe
injuries or death due to an uncontrolled landing. For these reasons, we recommend that you get a canopy
with a lower wing loading.


(This post was edited by DocPop on Feb 22, 2011, 9:05 AM)


JohnRich  (D License)

Feb 22, 2011, 9:08 AM
Post #10 of 78 (1901 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DocPop] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
John - I was referring to Brian Germain's recommendations on canopy size/jump #s.

Even Brian Germain shouldn't make recommendations based upon canopy size and jump numbers alone, without knowing the jumper's weight. For example, if the jumper is a 90-lb woman, then a 130 sq. ft. reserve is plenty, even if she doesn't have much experience.

In reply to:
As far as the illegal aspect is concerned, the following is from the PD Reserve manual:

These are both FAA (USA) and Performance Designs requirements that must be met for you to be
legal.

I look forward to hearing from others what FAR exists which restricts jumping based upon wing-loading.


(This post was edited by JohnRich on Feb 22, 2011, 9:09 AM)


theonlyski  (D License)

Feb 22, 2011, 9:18 AM
Post #11 of 78 (1883 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DocPop] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

There's no law that states you have to be good enough to jump a tiny reserve. Once you have a license, you're legally allowed to jump whatever certified reserve you want, within the manufacturers design limitations and TSO doesn't make it smart, but you can do it.

I was doing my coach course, during the break there was a guy that had about 75 jumps looking at buying a rig way too tiny for him, he easily weighed 200 slick, the main was a 150 and I believe the reserve was a 143. He had already had a ride on the reserve at one of the FL dz's (either sebastian or z-hills) where he landed fine, so he figured he would be safe in the rig.

What he didn't think about is that he was landing into a nice steady headwind... a nice large landing area... during the day, under those conditions, you can usually land a smaller canopy with no trouble.

Nothing we said would convince him to not buy the rig (it was a hell of a deal for a new jumper afterall) and obviously nobody stopped him from jumping it at other dz's, so the best we could hope for was that the S&TA would tell the DZO to ground him with it.


PLF's are fine and well, but screaming in under a tiny little handkerchief is going to hurt, ask him how he liked landing in 20+ mph winds under the T-10. How fast will that reserve fly, running with the 10mph wind speeding it up a little, on a down wind landing, when you're low and have to make a quick landing call and don't have time to check the wind direction and speed, in a back yard surrounded by fences while jacked up on adrenaline (which causes your fine motor skills to go right out the window).

My reserve is larger than my main, I don't want to have an emergency and instantly downsize while I'm already low.


(This post was edited by theonlyski on Feb 22, 2011, 9:40 AM)


DocPop  (C License)

Feb 22, 2011, 9:22 AM
Post #12 of 78 (1875 views)
Shortcut
Re: [theonlyski] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
There's no law that states you have to be good enough to jump a tiny reserve. Once you have a license, you're legally allowed to jump whatever certified reserve you want, doesn't make it smart, but you can do it.

With all due respect, that is your words vs. Performance Designs.

I know who I will believe.


mchamp  (D 32129)

Feb 22, 2011, 9:34 AM
Post #13 of 78 (1858 views)
Shortcut
Re: [theonlyski] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

I could of sworn of hearing/reading that there is a law somewhere stating that it is ILLEGAL to jump a reserve that you are above the max weight?

Example: a male with an exit weight 230lb would not be able to legally jump an optimum reserve 106. Am I correct?


Premier likestojump  (D License)

Feb 22, 2011, 9:39 AM
Post #14 of 78 (1845 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mchamp] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I could of sworn of hearing/reading that there is a law somewhere stating that it is ILLEGAL to jump a reserve that you are above the max weight?

Example: a male with an exit weight 230lb would not be able to legally jump an optimum reserve 106. Am I correct?

the only law you can break is not in regards to WL (those are not mandated by FAA), but in regards to maximum suspended weight.

we are governed by FAA - and FAA are the ones that issue the TSO which on PD Reserves mandates the max suspended weight.

In other words you would be breaking an FAR by violating a TSO.


theonlyski  (D License)

Feb 22, 2011, 9:39 AM
Post #15 of 78 (1845 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mchamp] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
I could of sworn of hearing/reading that there is a law somewhere stating that it is ILLEGAL to jump a reserve that you are above the max weight?

Example: a male with an exit weight 230lb would not be able to legally jump an optimum reserve 106. Am I correct?

That's correct, maximum weight is the absolute limit. I should have noted that they must be within the TSO limitations. My bad.


andreeb77  (D License)

Feb 22, 2011, 9:49 AM
Post #16 of 78 (1830 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DocPop] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
What seems strange to me is why someone who wants to jump a 170 as a main would feel OK downsizing 40 sq ft in an emergency. I don;t understand that logic.

It just looks so much better! Crazy

If I was the DZO I would have a word with that guy. Preferably, I would have had that word before he bought that reserve.


theonlyski  (D License)

Feb 22, 2011, 10:02 AM
Post #17 of 78 (1814 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DocPop] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
There's no law that states you have to be good enough to jump a tiny reserve. Once you have a license, you're legally allowed to jump whatever certified reserve you want, doesn't make it smart, but you can do it.

With all due respect, that is your words vs. Performance Designs.

I know who I will believe.

That's fine.

Keep in mind PD aren't the only reserves out there, other than that, the PDR-126 has a max weight of 254 (certified under C-23c(b) ) that means you can LEGALLY load it at about 2.01:1.

The PD-Optimum is certified under C-23d, and has a max weight of 254 lbs as well. so that will bring you to a ~2:1 with that one as well.

Also, the OP said that the person was loading it at ~1.4, you quoted only the >1.4 portion of the manual.

Furthermore, there is no canopy coach instructional rating, so who will sign off in the logbook that they're competent enough to jump it? Coaches are instructional ratings, so you think a coach with 100+ jumps has the knowledge or ability to properly coach someone on jumping a tiny canopy?

Could you coach him on jumping a reserve loaded at 1.4? You have over twice the minimums for getting a coach rating.


theonlyski  (D License)

Feb 22, 2011, 10:09 AM
Post #18 of 78 (1803 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DocPop] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

Just for comparison, take the Angelfire reserve (the jump shack). Even the 97ft reserve is certified to 254 lbs. That's about a 2.6:1 w/l Shocked


(This post was edited by theonlyski on Feb 22, 2011, 10:27 AM)


NovaTTT  (D 17887)

Feb 22, 2011, 10:45 AM
Post #19 of 78 (1771 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JohnRich] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Quote:
It is NOT illegal to jump a reserve loaded at 1.4 or higher. It might be contrary to the BSR's, but it's not against the law. You can legally jump a handkerchief if you want.

I'd like to see that TSO application. Tongue Laugh Angelic


DARK  (B 31685)

Feb 22, 2011, 11:07 AM
Post #20 of 78 (1740 views)
Shortcut
Re: [frontloop33] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
And his exit-weight should be near the maximum allowed weight for this reserve!

which is what?are you talking about the tso'd weight of the canopy?

asking without telling us the weight is usless


DocPop  (C License)

Feb 22, 2011, 11:11 AM
Post #21 of 78 (1737 views)
Shortcut
Re: [theonlyski] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Keep in mind PD aren't the only reserves out there, other than that, the PDR-126 has a max weight of 254 (certified under C-23c(b) ) that means you can LEGALLY load it at about 2.01:1.

But NOT (according to the PD reserve manual) at under 500 jumps.

In reply to:
Also, the OP said that the person was loading it at ~1.4, you quoted only the >1.4 portion of the manual.

Fair enough. If he is not >1.4 then it is legal, but IMO still ill-advised.

In reply to:
Furthermore, there is no canopy coach instructional rating, so who will sign off in the logbook that they're competent enough to jump it? Coaches are instructional ratings, so you think a coach with 100+ jumps has the knowledge or ability to properly coach someone on jumping a tiny canopy?

Could you coach him on jumping a reserve loaded at 1.4? You have over twice the minimums for getting a coach rating.

Dude - I didn't make the rules, I am only reporting on what the manual says. If PD are wrong, then this discussion is good and they need to correct the manual.

I have not got a coach rating but my goal is to teach canopy courses when I have the experience and knowledge to do so. Not before.


DocPop  (C License)

Feb 22, 2011, 11:14 AM
Post #22 of 78 (1729 views)
Shortcut
Re: [likestojump] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
the only law you can break is not in regards to WL (those are not mandated by FAA), but in regards to maximum suspended weight.

we are governed by FAA - and FAA are the ones that issue the TSO which on PD Reserves mandates the max suspended weight.

In other words you would be breaking an FAR by violating a TSO.

Then can you explain the part in the PD Reserve manual which states (in relation to 500 jumps to exceed a 1.4 WL on a reserve):

"These are both FAA (USA) and Performance Designs requirements that must be met for you to be legal."


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Feb 22, 2011, 11:24 AM
Post #23 of 78 (1712 views)
Shortcut
Re: [likestojump] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
I could of sworn of hearing/reading that there is a law somewhere stating that it is ILLEGAL to jump a reserve that you are above the max weight?

Example: a male with an exit weight 230lb would not be able to legally jump an optimum reserve 106. Am I correct?

the only law you can break is not in regards to WL (those are not mandated by FAA), but in regards to maximum suspended weight.

we are governed by FAA - and FAA are the ones that issue the TSO which on PD Reserves mandates the max suspended weight.

In other words you would be breaking an FAR by violating a TSO.

....................................................................

Sooner or later, insurance companies are going to figure out that jumping tiny reserves violates Federal Air Regulations, then they are going to use that as an excuse for refusing to pay medical expenses.

Kind of like wrecking your car - while violating rules that prohibit drinking and driving - means that most car insurance companies will try to weasel out of paying any damages.

Yes, I know that my comments may constitute "feeding the lawyers," - as I have said several times before on dz.com - lawyers are free to quite me in court (and court documents) as long as they pay my $10,000 expert witness fee every time they quote me in court.

Rob Warner
FAA Master Rigger
CSPA Rigger Examiner
Strong Tandem Examiner


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Feb 22, 2011, 11:25 AM
Post #24 of 78 (1708 views)
Shortcut
Re: [frontloop33] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

No!

Because the money he "saves" - on gear purchases - will be "lost" during the ambulance ride.


DARK  (B 31685)

Feb 22, 2011, 11:27 AM
Post #25 of 78 (1705 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerrob] Is this really safe? [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
In reply to:
I could of sworn of hearing/reading that there is a law somewhere stating that it is ILLEGAL to jump a reserve that you are above the max weight?

Example: a male with an exit weight 230lb would not be able to legally jump an optimum reserve 106. Am I correct?

the only law you can break is not in regards to WL (those are not mandated by FAA), but in regards to maximum suspended weight.

we are governed by FAA - and FAA are the ones that issue the TSO which on PD Reserves mandates the max suspended weight.

In other words you would be breaking an FAR by violating a TSO.

....................................................................

Sooner or later, insurance companies are going to figure out that jumping tiny reserves violates Federal Air Regulations, then they are going to use that as an excuse for refusing to pay medical expenses.

Kind of like wrecking your car - while violating rules that prohibit drinking and driving - means that most car insurance companies will try to weasel out of paying any damages.

Yes, I know that my comments may constitute "feeding the lawyers," - as I have said several times before on dz.com - lawyers are free to quite me in court (and court documents) as long as they pay my $10,000 expert witness fee every time they quote me in court.

Rob Warner
FAA Master Rigger
CSPA Rigger Examiner
Strong Tandem Examiner

what is that maximum suspended weight does anyone know?


First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Skydiving : Gear and Rigging

 


Search for (options)