Jan 4, 2004, 11:20 AM
Post #4 of 17
(1052 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Swanee] Evolution of cut away systems?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Actually, the 3-ring came right after Capewells, and before R-2's, R-3's, Sport Lifewells, the Strong Wrap, and several others. All of those releases were reactions to the 3-ring, not releases leading up to it.
Jan 4, 2004, 8:47 PM
Post #6 of 17
(931 views)
Shortcut
Re: [relyon] Evolution of cut away systems?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Like all the others, the Meyer's release came after the 3-ring. Once the idea of a single point release was out there, people tried every other way they could think of to accomplish the same thing. You'll probably see the same sort of reaction to the Skyhook.
Jan 4, 2004, 11:17 PM
Post #7 of 17
(910 views)
Shortcut
Re: [3ringheathen] Evolution of cut away systems?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
After the shot and half capewells someone came up with a one shot capewell. They were modified shot & halfs where the where the cable loops and some other parts were removed and a cable was attached from the capwell cover to the cam that held the riser to the harness.
The concept was to cutaway just pop the capewell covers.
The system didn't last very long after some capewell covers (one side) were accidently knocked open in a funnel or under canopy.
This was a long time ago so if anyone has any more info feel free to correct me.
Jan 5, 2004, 11:46 AM
Post #9 of 17
(816 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billbooth] Evolution of cut away systems?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Once the idea of a single point release was out there, people tried every other way they could think of to accomplish the same thing. You'll probably see the same sort of reaction to the Skyhook.
I wouldn't say it is a reaction to the Skyhook, since there were systems before the Skyhook. There may be a reaction to the marketing of the system, though. I had seen Eric Fradet's system in the past, (maybe '93?) but I never knew that it was available on a skydiving rig. The idea certainly isn't new new either, I thought it would be a good idea to deploy the reserve from the main when I was 12 or 13, but I didn't know HOW to do it I'm sure other people had thought of it before, also.
Jan 5, 2004, 11:54 AM
Post #10 of 17
(811 views)
Shortcut
Re: [KellyF] Evolution of cut away systems?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
As you know Kelly, I've been working on this system, on and off, for over 15 years now. It's only within the last year or so that I've been able to make it work to my satisfaction. There were single point releases before the 3-ring...some of mine and some designed by others. It's just that none of them were practical.
Jan 5, 2004, 3:17 PM
Post #11 of 17
(772 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billbooth] Evolution of cut away systems?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I know Bill, my point wasn't that you haven't worked hard on the Skyhook or took the idea from somewhere else, so much as the marketing of it is what will determine what other manufacturers will do. If there is market demand, other manufacturers will toy with their own designs, and then you will market yours as the superior system. If there isn't much demand, there probably won't be many other variations on the system.
Jan 5, 2004, 6:47 PM
Post #12 of 17
(749 views)
Shortcut
Re: [billbooth] Evolution of cut away systems?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
I know that my attitude with this may seem like I'm resisting change, but what could possibly be more effective and practical than the Simple Three-ring release???? It's an amazing device if you think about it. - mad props to Bill Booth.
Jan 6, 2004, 6:09 AM
Post #13 of 17
(705 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Unstable] Evolution of cut away systems?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
Every successful device in sport parachuting is "dirt simple". Witness the slider. For you younger jumpers, you wouldn't believe the complicated reefing devices for ram-airs that preceded it.
And that's exactly how I know when a system I'm working on is ready for market...when I hit myself on the forehead with the palm of my left hand, and go "duh!"
Jan 6, 2004, 9:50 AM
Post #15 of 17
(670 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Unstable] Evolution of cut away systems?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
I know that my attitude with this may seem like I'm resisting change, but what could possibly be more effective and practical than the Simple Three-ring release???? It's an amazing device if you think about it.
It may never be replaced in the sport market simply because it is able to handle the loads that it is going to encounter in the sport (and with some modifications the military also). It has also been able to evolve and adapt over the years. A simpler system could be made, but then it has to be accepted by the market. Bill spent lots of time (and I'm sure money) marketing this new device to skydivers, probably far more than what was originally spent in the initial R&D
Sometimes I think that the basic formula for a sport container has been set, 3-rings, ripcord actuated reserve, and hand deployed main. Kind of like cars have four wheels, seats, and a steering wheel. Sure, there are some variations, but they often don't catch on for some reason (usually practicaity), but modern cars are a far cry from what they were 50 years ago, so it will be fun to see what the future brings for skydiving equipment
Jan 6, 2004, 3:55 PM
Post #16 of 17
(634 views)
Shortcut
Re: [riggerrob] Evolution of cut away systems?
[In reply to]
Can't Post
In reply to:
Yanta Escape System Eagle Wrap Rocket Jet
I've actually used Rocket Jets. I had a Wonderhog I on which I added D-rings to the front of the harness to make a cutaway rig out of it, and used Rocket Jets on the cutaway canopy. You'd be amazed how fast you can release them when you're on your back looking up at a bag lock!
I'm sure other people had thought of it before, also.
