Forums: Skydiving: Safety and Training:
Intentional Breakaways

 

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

freeflyer58D  (B 32456)

Apr 8, 2012, 10:01 PM
Post #1 of 53 (3348 views)
Shortcut
Intentional Breakaways Can't Post

Ok, so today the topic of doing an intentional cutaway was brought up. We have read all the "legal". 14CFR Part 105, BSR's and we see nothing that requires a "Tri" system. i completely see the reasoning behind the tertiary system, but we are only interested with the legal side of things at this point. so, im hoping someone can point us to the right spot. after reviewing part 105, it is left very open ended. you could very easily read into it whatever way you wanted. especially when discussing the definition of Reserve parachute. just curious if anyone knows of any "legal" binding literature one way or the other.

so far: Part 105... No person may conduct a parachute operation using a single-harness, dual-parachute system, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow any person to conduct a parachute operation from that aircraft using a single-harness, dual-parachute system, unless that system has at least one main parachute, one approved reserve parachute, and one approved single person harness and container that are packed as follows

BSR's: 2. Pre-planned breakaway jumps are to be made by only class C- and D-license holders using FAA TSO'ed equipment. [E]

excerpt from a skydiving magazine article: One reason it's not more popular is the lack of suitable equipment. Although it's legal to make intentional cutaways with a standard sport rig -- one main and one FAA-approved reserve -- most skydivers would rather have two jettisonable mains and a reserve.
http://www.skydivingmagazine.com/questions/ques14.htm

really hoping to get some good legal reference on this! not peoples opinions.


virgin-burner

Apr 8, 2012, 10:31 PM
Post #2 of 53 (3325 views)
Shortcut
Re: [freeflyer58D] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

if you're so worried about the legal stuff.. why dont you just pack yourself a mal and go for it?

besides that, i still think it's fucking stupid, the only time i've ever thought about i was in my first year, had hardly 100 jumps and just didnt want my expensive reserve-repack be wasted. did i say it's fucking stupid already? it IS fucking stupid!


crotalus01  (B 28932)

Apr 8, 2012, 11:13 PM
Post #3 of 53 (3302 views)
Shortcut
Re: [freeflyer58D] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

Dont know the legal side of it, but there was a guy in (I believe) Lake Wales FL that celebrated his A license by chopping a good main - and got a baglock on his reserve. I am sure someone here can provide the details as I read about it on here - or maybe it was just bullshit. At any rate, why take the chance? Your reserve is your last chance, and they are pretty damn reliable, but they are NOT foolproof...


airtwardo  (D License)

Apr 8, 2012, 11:21 PM
Post #4 of 53 (3299 views)
Shortcut
Re: [virgin-burner] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
if you're so worried about the legal stuff.. why dont you just pack yourself a mal and go for it?

besides that, i still think it's fucking stupid, the only time i've ever thought about i was in my first year, had hardly 100 jumps and just didnt want my expensive reserve-repack be wasted. did i say it's fucking stupid already? it IS fucking stupid!

That dress looks good on you...Tongue


JohnMitchell  (D 6462)

Apr 8, 2012, 11:31 PM
Post #5 of 53 (3294 views)
Shortcut
Re: [virgin-burner] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
just didnt want my expensive reserve-repack be wasted. did i say it's fucking stupid already? it IS fucking stupid!
Do it at the end of the repack cycle. Jeez, kids these days! Laugh

I've done intentional reserve deployments doing certification work. I wore a third parachute on the front. Smile


Premier billvon  (D 16479)
Moderator
Apr 8, 2012, 11:37 PM
Post #6 of 53 (3293 views)
Shortcut
Re: [freeflyer58D] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

Use either breakaway risers with a second main or two sets of mini risers (with a second main) on a large harness ring. Meets both the letter and intent of FAA regs.

Ideal is, of course, a rig designed for the purpose, like UPT's Skyhook demo rig.


mjosparky  (D 5476)

Apr 9, 2012, 1:42 AM
Post #7 of 53 (3268 views)
Shortcut
Re: [freeflyer58D] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

There is nothing illegal about doing a intention cutaway. Part 105 says you must be wearing an approved harness, an approved reserve and one main parachute.

Sparky


105.43 Use of single-harness, dual-parachute systems.

No person may conduct a parachute operation using a single-harness, dual-parachute system, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow any person to conduct a parachute operation from that aircraft using a single-harness, dual-parachute system, unless that system has at least one main parachute, one approved reserve parachute, and one approved single person harness and container that are packed as follows:



obelixtim  (D 84)

Apr 9, 2012, 2:22 AM
Post #8 of 53 (3252 views)
Shortcut
Re: [freeflyer58D] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

 
By definitiion, any time you chop a mal, you are doing an intentional breakaway.

The difference comes in the amount of time you have spent planning it.....seconds as opposed to an hour or two.

Why you would want to chop a perfectly good main with only your reserve as backup isn't too smart, I think. Of course you rely on your reserve every jump you do, but pushing the envelope unnecessarily doesn't seem like a good idea.

We had a rig which would take two mains, and we always static lined the first one to eliminate the need to have a ripcord in your hand. I use it a few times on demos,.. it was also good to test jump a few home made designs and systems we came up with.

An intentional cutaway on such a system though is no real substitute for dealing with a real malfunction, because the stress factor is so much less. When you are carrying 3 parachutes, and are cutting away at a higher altitude than you would normally be opening at is not really a big deal at all, even when you jump a deliberately packed malfunction.

Yes you are physically performing a cutaway, but it is really not that much different from a cutaway in a hanging harness, apart from the fact you are at a higher altitude.

For fun, testing or demos, fine, but there really isn't a lot of point in doing an intentional, as its not really a realistic scenario...

For someone who has never had a mal and needs one for rating purposes, perhaps that rule needs revisiting. You might as well have a power line or tree landing as one of the things you have to experience.


virgin-burner

Apr 9, 2012, 2:29 AM
Post #9 of 53 (3249 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
In reply to:
if you're so worried about the legal stuff.. why dont you just pack yourself a mal and go for it?

besides that, i still think it's fucking stupid, the only time i've ever thought about i was in my first year, had hardly 100 jumps and just didnt want my expensive reserve-repack be wasted. did i say it's fucking stupid already? it IS fucking stupid!

That dress looks good on you...Tongue

yea-yea, wasnt long before i've had a REAL manly reason to use my reserve anyway.. thinking about it, have you ever exited from 180ft!? i have! Wink

LaughLaughLaugh


popsjumper  (D 999999999)

Apr 9, 2012, 6:12 AM
Post #10 of 53 (3203 views)
Shortcut
Re: [freeflyer58D] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

Would you please clarify the question?

As far as I can tell, you answered your own question by quoting the FARs and a relevant BSR...neither of which make any reference to a requirement for anything more than two parachutes.

I'm not clear on what you are seeing as "open-ended".

Had you asked the advisability of an intentional cutaway on a dual-parachute system, I could answer that easily.


airtwardo  (D License)

Apr 9, 2012, 6:35 AM
Post #11 of 53 (3186 views)
Shortcut
Re: [virgin-burner] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

thinking about it, have you ever exited from 180ft!? i have!

In reply to:

Yeah me too...the 1st time we turned 9 points on an 8way...then we got better!


monkycndo  (D License)

Apr 9, 2012, 7:00 AM
Post #12 of 53 (3169 views)
Shortcut
Re: [airtwardo] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
thinking about it, have you ever exited from 180ft!? i have!

In reply to:

Yeah me too...the 1st time we turned 9 points on an 8way...then we got better!

I cry bullshit.






We know you never got better.Laugh


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Apr 9, 2012, 11:00 AM
Post #13 of 53 (3043 views)
Shortcut
Re: [obelixtim] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

"
In reply to:
By definitiion, any time you chop a mal, you are doing an intentional breakaway. ...
"

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

I disagree.
Main malfunctions are never "intentional" ergo any cutaway from a malfunctioning main is an emergency.

"Intentional" implies that the cutaway is "optional." IOW you could land that main without injury.

Intentional cutaways must be declared before you board the airplane. Most regulations and DZs require you to wear a second (certified) reserve when doing intentional cutaways.


freeflyer58D  (B 32456)

Apr 9, 2012, 11:56 AM
Post #14 of 53 (3007 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerrob] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

This is exactly the "open ended" part that we are having trouble verifying. you ask for 5 peoples interpretation of the BSR's/ FAR's and everyone has a different opinion. i guess the real question we are looking for an answer to is "when is a 3 canopy system required by regulation?" RiggerRob has said "Most regulations and DZs require you to wear a second (certified) reserve when doing intentional cutaways. " I cant vouch for each DZ's procedures for cutaways, but i also cant find regulation anywhere that makes mention of the terch system. the debate was never in reference to what the best practice is for doing intentional cutaways, most everyone is in agreement that a 3 parachute system adds redundancy to the whole event. it was more of a "find the reference" debate. so far, it appears that doing it with a sport rig is acceptable with a C/D license, and TSO'ed equipment. just curious if anyone else could point to the correct references. most people have tended to think that it is illegal to perform the cutaway without a Tri system. but no one has been able to prove that to be the case.


obelixtim  (D 84)

Apr 9, 2012, 12:17 PM
Post #15 of 53 (2988 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerrob] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Main malfunctions are never "intentional" ergo any cutaway from a malfunctioning main is an emergency.

It comes down to which nit you want to pick, The mal is simply the platform from which you depart the scene. If I am riding a mal, cutting it away is definitely one of my intentions at that point.

Pre planned is probably a better term to use...because a mal certainly isn't planned. Dealing with it is.

A DZO would be less than wise to allow you to board the aircraft with only two parachutes with the intention to cut one away no matter what.

But as far as formal regulations to make it illegal to do a pre planned cutaway without a tertiary, I doubt it is in print anywhere, simply because it is a fairly rare event, and I doubt the lawmakers have ever considered it..

The 3 parachute "rule" has simply evolved as a sensible option, by sensible skydivers, looking after their own arses.

How about the in flight transfer scenario. That could also be classified as an intentional cutaway. I've seen a couple done at close quarters by people whose reserves are due for a repack.

One in particular I remember came as close to an entanglement and bounce as you'd ever want to get without actually doing so. The jumper screwed it up completely, getting himself tangled up in his reserve, and THEN chopping his main....luckily he fell out of the entanglement.

He needed clean boxers after that one.....


(This post was edited by obelixtim on Apr 9, 2012, 12:21 PM)


phoenixlpr  (D 3049)

Apr 9, 2012, 12:32 PM
Post #16 of 53 (2975 views)
Shortcut
Re: [obelixtim] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
The 3 parachute "rule" has simply evolved as a sensible option, by sensible skydivers, looking after their own arses.

It is also funny if you activate the 3rd after cutting away the 1st in order. The 2nd in order my have better cut-away system, than a hook knife.Cool


Skyper

Apr 9, 2012, 1:10 PM
Post #17 of 53 (2947 views)
Shortcut
Re: [phoenixlpr] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

Can someone explain or post a link which explains how this 3 chutes system actually works? I used to jump with belly reserve, but that one was not possible to be cut-off. So I wonder if you have a classic sport rig with main and (non-cuttable) reserve in which way can you cut that (1st) reserve prior the deployment of the 2nd reserve, except with a knife?
p.s. sorry if this is a bit off topic question.


obelixtim  (D 84)

Apr 9, 2012, 1:14 PM
Post #18 of 53 (2941 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Skyper] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

 Speaking of the system we used to use....We had two mains, with a reserve on the front, you could chop both mains.

On other systems, the tertiary has no pilot chute, is a roundie and is deployed by hand, i.e. you pull the ripcord, take hold of the canopy and throw it away from you, then feed out the lines.

Its how reserve procedures used to be back before cutaways were common.

A bit scary if you are in a spin, you have to remember to throw the reserve into the spin.

This kind of tertiary is the type used by hang glider pilots.


(This post was edited by obelixtim on Apr 9, 2012, 1:17 PM)


JerryBaumchen  (D 1543)

Apr 9, 2012, 2:00 PM
Post #19 of 53 (2908 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Skyper] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi Skyper,

There have been chest mounted containers that are attached with 3-rings systems instead of the 'conventional' snap & D-ring.

This allows the user to deploy the 'chest pack' canopy, let it open & fly a little, then cutaway & open the main that would be mounted on your back in a normal location; keeping your back-mounted reserve ready to be used if necessary.

Here are two photos of the Strong Entr 3-canopy system. The 3rd photo is one I just came across; I do not think it is of a Strong system.

JerryBaumchen

PS) Back about 1980 I was contacted by some Japanese jumpers who wanted a cutaway system using two ParaCommanders on the back & a chest pack on the front. I built the harness with one ParaCommander risers attached via 1 1/2 shots & the other ParaCommander risers attached via 3-ring system. The idea was to cutaway with the 1 1/2 shots first, then cutaway the 2nd ParaCommander, if necessary, using the 3-ring system. Most rigs in Japan at that time were still using 1 1/2 shots.
Attachments: TriDem-1.jpg (121 KB)
  TriDem-2.jpg (95.5 KB)
  TriDem-3.jpg (105 KB)


JerryBaumchen  (D 1543)

Apr 9, 2012, 2:06 PM
Post #20 of 53 (2902 views)
Shortcut
Re: [mjosparky] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

Hi Sparky,

Quote:
There is nothing illegal about doing a intention cutaway. Part 105 says you must be wearing an approved harness, an approved reserve and one main parachute.

I agree with you.

Until I come across some FAA document that specifically says I cannot do something, then I can do it, what every it might be.

Just my $0.02, I only speak for myself; I am not the FAA.

JerryBaumchen


FanOfFalling  (B 6359)

Apr 9, 2012, 2:13 PM
Post #21 of 53 (2893 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JerryBaumchen] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

Not a specific reply to you Jerry(previous poster) but off that line of thought.

Is there a (current)legal point at which premeditated intention to use your reserve makes it no longer a 'reserve'. If you leave the aircraft with the 100% intention of deploying this reserve chute can it be said to be held in reserve? Could it be called just a second planned main deployment? (regardless of planform, branding, naming, being packed by a certified rigger ect)


fcajump  (D 15598)

Apr 9, 2012, 2:16 PM
Post #22 of 53 (2891 views)
Shortcut
Re: [obelixtim] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
By definitiion, any time you chop a mal, you are doing an intentional breakaway.

The difference comes in the amount of time you have spent planning it.....seconds as opposed to an hour or two.

Why you would want to chop a perfectly good main with only your reserve as backup isn't too smart, I think. Of course you rely on your reserve every jump you do, but pushing the envelope unnecessarily doesn't seem like a good idea.

We had a rig which would take two mains, and we always static lined the first one to eliminate the need to have a ripcord in your hand. I use it a few times on demos,.. it was also good to test jump a few home made designs and systems we came up with.

An intentional cutaway on such a system though is no real substitute for dealing with a real malfunction, because the stress factor is so much less. When you are carrying 3 parachutes, and are cutting away at a higher altitude than you would normally be opening at is not really a big deal at all, even when you jump a deliberately packed malfunction.

Yes you are physically performing a cutaway, but it is really not that much different from a cutaway in a hanging harness, apart from the fact you are at a higher altitude.

For fun, testing or demos, fine, but there really isn't a lot of point in doing an intentional, as its not really a realistic scenario...

For someone who has never had a mal and needs one for rating purposes, perhaps that rule needs revisiting. You might as well have a power line or tree landing as one of the things you have to experience.

I've had one individual that put forth the argument that since the FAA regs indicate a single harness, dual canopy system, adding a third canopy might be seen as a violation...

Legal question asside, having chopped from both a real mal and an intentional... I found the intentional much scarrier... it was the anticipation that got to me. With the real mal, there was no time to think about it only time to execute the procedures. The cutaway, well... you could do it now, or later or just land it... (why I used a too small to land for my first... no way was I gonna chicken out under a 24' flat at my 254-lb exit weight)

Very fun, but get a rigger who has experience to work with you before trying it.

JW


obelixtim  (D 84)

Apr 9, 2012, 2:54 PM
Post #23 of 53 (2872 views)
Shortcut
Re: [JerryBaumchen] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

Quote:
Here are two photos of the Strong Entr 3-canopy system. The 3rd photo is one I just came across; I do not think it is of a Strong system.

JerryBaumchen

That loooks like a good system. Ours was built back in the early 70's, initially for demos, out of a B4 H & C, with two mains and two sets of 1 1/2 shots, and a normal belly wart on the front.

The sight of it would prolly scare the crap out of people today, but it worked well. I did quite a few demos with it, showing "emergency" procedures, which wasn't strictly accurate, but the crowds didn't know, and thought it was great.....We always let them know what we were planning, of course...


(This post was edited by obelixtim on Apr 9, 2012, 2:57 PM)


phoenixlpr  (D 3049)

Apr 9, 2012, 3:12 PM
Post #24 of 53 (2859 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Skyper] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

In reply to:
Can someone explain or post a link which explains how this 3 chutes system actually works? I used to jump with belly reserve, but that one was not possible to be cut-off. So I wonder if you have a classic sport rig with main and (non-cuttable) reserve in which way can you cut that (1st) reserve prior the deployment of the 2nd reserve, except with a knife?
p.s. sorry if this is a bit off topic question.
I've seen one build from a wings.
It has 5 handles.
Throw-out for the 1st(main).
A set of cut-away and reserve handle outside for cut the 1st and deploy, the 2nd,"reserve".
A set of cut-away and reserve handle inside for cut the 2st and deploy, the 3nd(reserve).

I was built for tandem in mind. You suppose to use the outer set first.


(This post was edited by phoenixlpr on Apr 9, 2012, 3:13 PM)


riggerrob  (D 14840)

Apr 9, 2012, 7:34 PM
Post #25 of 53 (2784 views)
Shortcut
Re: [obelixtim] Intentional Breakaways [In reply to] Can't Post

"
In reply to:
... How about the in flight transfer scenario. That could also be classified as an intentional cutaway. I've seen a couple done at close quarters by people whose reserves are due for a repack.

One in particular I remember came as close to an entanglement and bounce as you'd ever want to get without actually doing so. The jumper screwed it up completely, getting himself tangled up in his reserve, and THEN chopping his main....luckily he fell out of the entanglement.

He needed clean boxers after that one.....
"

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

I must be getting old, but I thought that canopy transfers fell out of fashion around the same time that round reserves fell out of fashion (late 1980s)????


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

Forums : Skydiving : Safety and Training

 


Search for (options)