robibird 2 #1 December 19, 2003 hi, I agree with most of you about how the manufacturers has to approach to the items they build. They have to understand the subject as best is possible ( this was not the case in Performance Variable ) They made the BASE rig and they just put the whatever canopy in to the rig with the Type 17 risers in for making photo for web site ( they were in hurry to introduce product ) This shows that they are not really ''at home'' with the base jumping in general. This simple mistake actually made to them - the worst ever advertise. I am sure that they have sold maybe few rigs since they introduce the rig. Other subject is the future of the equipment: Slinks, microlines, small risers, smaller canopies... Well, why not one day!! Keeping stubborn approach is not good and it doesn't contributing developing in any area. Soon, I am sure, we will have smaller and lighter canopies. Also I believe that canopies and rigs will be designed for specific purpose in BASE jumping. Slider down: Big docile canopy almost accuracy canopy with good opening characteristics. WS: light and small canopy with good opening and deep brake fly characteristics Rigs: WS rigs will be lighter and smaller. However, it will take time for general BASE public to accept this toys , but I am sure it will happened. Well, I will always look for lighter equipment on some nasty and long hikes :) my 2 cents Robibird RobertRobert Pecnik [email protected] www.phoenix-fly.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #2 December 19, 2003 I think this is a very good discussion to have, and I don't want it to get lost in the general "mini-riser" discussion. I've split it off from there. I think Robert is totally right that BASE gear is diverging into wildly different sets of gear for different jumps. Wingsuit rigs (and canopies) are getting smaller, and I foresee a day when all wingsuit pilots are jumping something that looks a lot more like Robert's setup (I think it's a 170 or 190 with micro lines) than it looks like modern BASE gear. At the same time, an American gear manufacturer has been developing a "low and slow" canopy designed only for slider off jumps. The ideal gear for a wingsuit jump is so different from the ideal gear for a slider down solid object that, viewed objectively, they must inevitably diverge in the same way that BASE gear diverged from general skydiving gear.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #3 December 19, 2003 BASE 428 said: QuoteYou are correct that every year, we come up with new ideas, concepts, materials, and toys to expand the sport of BASE and skydiving. If it wasn't for your creative mind, where would the wingsuit be today, if at all? There is a big difference between function and performance. Type 8 risers just need to function on a BASE jump, while on a skydive, others may need the performance aspect of a Type 17 riser. For connector links, performance is not really a requirement in my opinion, therefore the standard connector links work fine. And just so you don't think I'm old school and resistant to change, I'm currently working on the construction of a slider that can quickly transform from large hole mesh, to small hole mesh, and then to a sail slider.....all in about 20 seconds. No need to swap out sliders. The design is finished and I just need to build one. I've also got a nice 3-ring modification that would eliminate hard pulls during line twists, but that design is still being worked on in CAD. I also have a 3-ringless rig and I love it. -- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #4 December 19, 2003 QuoteAnd just so you don't think I'm old school and resistant to change, I'm currently working on the construction of a slider that can quickly transform from large hole mesh, to small hole mesh, and then to a sail slider.....all in about 20 seconds. No need to swap out sliders. I built one of these a few years ago. All you need to do is put pile velcro along the bottom side of the large mesh slider (on the tape), then make a slider shaped (minus the corners for the grommet) piece of small hole mesh with the hook velcro on it. You can also make a sail piece. The only problem I encountered was putting the more resistant piece on top (the sail patch tended to get blown off as the slider came down). That was easily fixed by putting the "patch" on the bottom of the slider. I constructed mine after seeing one of Space's students using one a few years ago. Not sure if the original idea was Space's, or the student's, or came from somewhere else.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base428 1 #5 December 19, 2003 The slider I'm building is a little different, but functions the same. It comes in handy if you're jumping a terminal wall, and then later in the day you move to a 3 second wall. You can switch from the sail or small hole mesh to large hole mesh for the shorter delays. Tom, the slider design you write about was discussed with a BASE gear manufacturer earlier this year. We concluded that having the velcro exposed might catch a suspension line on opening. Do you think this would be a factor in your design? QuoteI built one of these a few years ago.(c)2010 Vertical Visions. No unauthorized duplication permitted. <==For the media only Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base283 0 #6 December 19, 2003 Quote I constructed mine after seeing one of Space's students using one a few years ago. Not sure if the original idea was Space's, or the student's, or came from somewhere else. Hi Tom. It was not my idea, it was the students, this idea was tried and dashed by DM and AF (1990?) because of the slider inverting and and insert being blown off exposing the hook and hanging material to the lines. I have since told the student to cease this practice after notification. Are you still using this system? Any comments from the Manu´s? Take care, space Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #7 December 19, 2003 QuoteAre you still using this system? Nope. I mostly built it as a curiosity. I never jump with a sail slider, and only use a small hole mesh slider on about 3% of my jumps. So, the value to me was pretty limited.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base515 0 #8 December 19, 2003 ***Slinks, microlines, small risers, smaller canopies... Well, why not one day!!Quote I started using PD's reserve slinks a few years ago on both of my BASE rigs . I have about 250 to 300 jumps on them now. I started using them because: I saw a skydivng malfunction, where the silicone slider bumper came off on deplyoment and slid up the lines and choked off the slider as it was coming down. This resulted in a cutaway and reserve deployment. I've always believed in the KISS method of things and Slinks seem to feel this role better. They are stronger, no worries about crossloading, and no slider bumpers that need to be sewn down and watched for cracks. They are simpler as long as they are hookedup right the first time. The only concern I ever had was that they may allow the slider to come over the slinks and down the riser and onto the brakes, before they were released. With over a 100 terminal jumps on them, it doesn't seem to be a problem. It seems the type 8 webbing when under pressure is stiff enough and wide enough to prevent this from happining. As always this is just my own opinion based on my own observations. I haven't met anyone else who is using them yet, and would be interested in hearing from others who may be. later Mike May we live long and die out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites riggersam 0 #9 December 19, 2003 Do you ever take the slider off, or do you just tie it down? How particular are you about where you land/pack? In the environments that I find myself in, I don't think it would be a good option. I don't have a dedicated slider-up rig and a dedicate slider-off rig, so find myself switching it back and forth a fair amount. Just considering the possible effects of dirt, dust, water and rocks on a slink and I quickly find myself a lot more comfortable working with a metal link. Then again, maybe I just like being able to take a wrench to my rig... Mark Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base515 0 #10 December 20, 2003 I leave my sliders on and tie them down on slider down jumps. I think taking it off and on is waste of time. You open yourself up for rigging errors, by taking it off and on. I go from slider up to slider down all the the time, and simply run some short pieces of old line through the riser opening at the slink to tie it off with. It hasn't shown any wear on the riser or slink from tying it off this way. Having it tied on also gives you a cross-link in case one riser fails. I 've jump into water with them and have jumped a lot in sandy areas near our coast. I haven'y noticed any wear on th slinks from them. Treat them just like your lines, don't pack where you will thrash your lines and your slinks will be fine. I've packed outdoors in the grass many times and it seemed fine. i think the worst situtation is some of the packing tarps at some of the dz's near the coast. They get covered in light sand and grind into your lines against the nylon of the tarp. Just brush the area clear or use a packing mat. Quite frankly my lines are looking worse for the wear than the slinks are and they were new at about the same time. They work great for me in my enviroment, but like I said i leave my slider on at all times. If you have to take it off and on, it might be easier to use metal links. They're simple and work great in my opinion.(slinks that is) peace Mike May we live long and die out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rfarris 1 #11 December 20, 2003 Quote I have about 250 to 300 jumps on them now. Are you saying you have 250 to 300 jumps on the original set of Slinks on each rig? If not, how often do you replace them. QuoteI started using them because.......They are stronger....... Has this been tested and published in the BASE environment? And if so, why aren't they standard on rigs just like the wide risers, opposed to the mini risers, which seem to have been proven inferior? I ask this because of your disclaimer statement at the end of your post. I'm just curious. Thanks Rod Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base515 0 #12 December 20, 2003 250+ divided between two sets of slinks. About evenly split. Pd Reserve slinks have been proved to be stronger than #5 metal links which are the standerd on BASE rigs. The disclaimer is for just stating my opinion. I'll probabily change them the same time I would get new lines, though the lines are wearing at a higher rate. The slinks are still in great shape. They don't see much sunlight in my neck of the woods and haven't been too abused packing outdoors. In the chain of gear that saves my life, they seem to be a very strong link. No slider bumpers also removes a link that can and has caused malfunctions. There was a post by Adam from CR, stating the advantages and disadvantages of slinks from his point of view. i don't know how to copy that link over to here though. May we live long and die out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TomAiello 25 #13 December 20, 2003 QuoteThere was a post by Adam from CR, stating the advantages and disadvantages of slinks from his point of view. i don't know how to copy that link over to here though. Here you go.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites andy2 0 #14 December 20, 2003 [QUOTE]Pd Reserve slinks have been proved to be stronger than #5 metal links which are the standerd on BASE rigs[/QUOTE] Just out of curiousity, does anybody know how much testing PD did on their reserve slinks where they similated something you might run across in a BASE enviroment (i.e. mud, water, dust, sand, etc getting ground into the slink upon landing in a sketchy landing area) ? Seems like an amount of dirt/water being grinded into the slink over a period of time would decrease the integrity. --------------------------------------------- let my inspiration flow, in token rhyme suggesting rhythm... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ernokaikkonen 0 #15 December 20, 2003 Quote I've also got a nice 3-ring modification that would eliminate hard pulls during line twists, but that design is still being worked on in CAD. I thought riser-inserts work pretty well for that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites NickDG 23 #16 December 20, 2003 >Slinks, microlines, small risers, smaller canopies... >Well, why not one day!! >Keeping stubborn approach is not good and it >doesn't contributing developing in any area. GOING BACKWARDS . . . Bringing a bunch of cheesy skydiving stuff to BASE jumping isn’t innovative. In fact, it should be the other way around, if skydivers used stronger, cleaner, less complicated gear not so many of them would be dying. Making gear smaller and lighter is all skydiving manufactures can do before they have to re-write the manuals, and in the case of TSO’d gear, go through the whole rigmarole, and spend the money, in the FAA shake and bake process. BASE riggers and manufactures are not so encumbered and have always been free to dream, cut, and sew in the afternoon and then just go try it later that night. One of the reasons you are so comfortable jumping a single canopy system right now is we (not me in particular) figured out a long time ago if you build BASE gear to be simpler to use, cleaner in design, and let the function follow the form, then you just did away with about 99 reasons why you need a reserve in the first place. In addition, the one canopy you are BASE jumping is so tough you can hang a truck on it. Sure, I’ll take a chance and jump my Stiletto once or twice without a reserve, when I’m getting paid for it. On the other hand I’ll fun-a-way to my skydiving seven cell reserve because I know between me and my knife, no matter what happens, I’ll most likely have something landable at the end. Once you go smaller (and less docile) and then break a line, split a seam, or blow a rib it’s a whole new design and you are the test pilot. Plus BASE canopies still get stashed in the bushes and slammed in car doors and trunks. There aren’t that many manicured lawns in the BASE world. Over the years I’ve been lucky enough to be around some of the brightest minds in gear manufacturing and believe me, you can’t say they aren’t innovative. In fact, we owe them a debt of gratitude for what they didn’t bring to market. I remember Todd came up to me once and said, hey Nick, look at this, and then after he explained it to me, I was floored, this was it, this is the answer, and he smiled and said, “not for a few years yet, buddy, keep it to yourself.” Cooler (and better) things are coming . . . NickBASE 194 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites NickDG 23 #17 December 20, 2003 >where the silicone slider bumper came off on deplyoment and slid up the lines and choked off the slider as it was coming down. This resulted in a cutaway and reserve deployment.< Gee, run a needle and some waxed cord around the slider bumper and the connector link . . . Hello? Nick BASE 194 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Faber 0 #18 December 20, 2003 Quote#5 metal links a freind of mine who is skydiver,but built tools all day long actualy has qustioniesed our metal links.He think we use to small rills(sorry word,the one around that secure/close the link)thinking of what normaly demands are out side skywold.His consern were that we could even blow a metal link(i saw 3(2 from same canopy opening)which were blown in a regular skydive(RW jump).A concerne to think of,in BASE it would be a fatality for sure... im not a brain in such,i just wanted to pass the info/consern i talked about whith a guy who is experiened in tool making and skydiving. He recoment to buy metal links were thouse rills(again) are 1/3 of the linkas a minimum. personaly i use slinks at my skydive gear,unless some one buys it soon,and metal links at both my BASE rigs Stay safe Stefan Faber Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base515 0 #19 December 20, 2003 Gee, run a needle and some waxed cord around the slider bumper and the connector link . . Quote or use slinks and remove 2 extra links in the gear chain. Bumpers,waxed line,needle.. all this extra stuff and time to install and or remove, just to make an inferior piece of metal acceptable for use? Doesn't that just sound wrong? Mike May we live long and die out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites robibird 2 #20 December 20, 2003 GOING BACKWARDS . . . Bringing a bunch of cheesy skydiving stuff to BASE jumping isn't innovative. In fact, it should be the other way around, if skydivers used stronger, cleaner, less complicated gear not so many of them would be dying. Making gear smaller and lighter is all skydiving manufactures can do before they have to re-write the manuals, and in the case of TSO'd gear, go through the whole rigmarole, and spend the money, in the FAA shake and bake process. _________________________________________________ OK, so you say that skydiving community has to follow the BASE manufactures. Well, this is very interesting statement. If this would be the case, trough all this years we would still be jumping Strato-Clouds, Stratostar and other ''state of the art'' ram-air canopies, and for many years. Please explain me what is complicated in skydiving equipment?! TSO and other papers, '' law hassle'', etc. are here not because skydivers want them, it because of the overall legal system (and related aviation and skydiving regulations) most countries have. Luckily BASE manufacturers do not have to deal with that, and if they would they would not exist at all. Do not forget that BASE manufacturers actually benefited because skydiving equipment manufacturers learned how to meet those standards with the technology that is advancing every day. And don't forget that those standards and regulations are primarily dealing with safety issues of those people using that equipment. Also, have in mind that most of technology and know-how for skydiving equipment was simply transferred to the BASE equipment production. And thanks to that, all BASE equipment can easily comply with standards for skydiving equipment. _________________________________________________ BASE riggers and manufactures are not so encumbered and have always been free to dream, cut, and sew in the afternoon and then just go try it later that night. One of the reasons you are so comfortable jumping a single canopy system right now is we (not me in particular) figured out a long time ago if you build BASE gear to be simpler to use, cleaner in design, and let the function follow the form, then you just did away with about 99 reasons why you need a reserve in the first place. ______________________________________________ IMHO, BASE jumpers and riggers were those people who had passion and were brave enough to try to jump low object and smart enough to adjust their SKYDIVING gear in such way to survive the jump. With time, number of those people started to grow and only then those who had abilities and knowledge started with modifications of existing skydiving equipment, and finally, with production of BASE equipment. Actually, BASE was almost never a separate sport or activity; it had always kept close relations with skydiving. BASE jumping canopies (now talking about canopies) started to change recently, in last 5 years or so, pretty much because of competition among BASE manufactures and drastically increased interest in BASE. Five years ago it was absolutely normal to see some Pegasus, Ravens or similar 7 cell canopies. Nowadays this is considered as unacceptable, right? If you look to the BASE canopy in particular, you'll see that there were no major improvements in airfoils or shapes. I don't think that we have already found the best airfoil, shape or and best materials. Reasons are, IMHO, lack of money, small market and very, very conservative approach to BASE activities. I agree, it has to be a bit conservative, but to be strongly against some everything new that is coming in to the sport.... ? _______________________________________________ In addition, the one canopy you are BASE jumping is so tough you can hang a truck on it. Sure, I'll take a chance and jump my Stiletto once or twice without a reserve, when I'm getting paid for it. On the other hand I'll fun-a-way to my skydiving seven cell reserve because I know between me and my knife, no matter what happens, I'll most likely have something landable at the end. _______________________________________________ Well, we have trucks of different sizes, don't we? Standards, which skydiving equipment has to meet, are well known and as long as the new stuff does not meet those standards, specific canopy or rig will not be ready for sale. These are the reasons why I think that discussion about how strong something should be is completely irrelevant. It is all about technology and, for instance type of fold, strength of used materials, reinforcing systems and load distribution. I think that 99% of the new jumpers who came to the sport in last two years would refuse to jump some Ravens or Pegasus, even though those canopies were the best at their time and were able to hold the truck too. _________________________________________________ Once you go smaller (and less docile) and then break a line, split a seam, or blow a rib it's a whole new design and you are the test pilot. Plus BASE canopies still get stashed in the bushes and slammed in car doors and trunks. There aren't that many manicured lawns in the BASE world. Over the years I've been lucky enough to be around some of the brightest minds in gear manufacturing and believe me, you can't say they aren't innovative. In fact, we owe them a debt of gratitude for what they didn't bring to market. I remember Todd came up to me once and said, hey Nick, look at this, and then after he explained it to me, I was floored, this was it, this is the answer, and he smiled and said, not for a few years yet, buddy, keep it to yourself. _________________________________________________ Agree, I never said anything against those people. In contrary, they have and will always have my support. I can only applaud to those who invented the tail gate, multi, V-tec, MDV or Vented PC or many other things, but I am all for let people be creative and explore the limit. Why should we not try to introduce some performance of modern skydiving canopies in BASE? If we can do that with same or even increased safety level, BASE could only benefit from that. __________________________________________________ Cooler (and better) things are coming . . . ________________________________________________ Yes they are coming , but not from the Mars.... Regards RobibirdRobert Pecnik [email protected] www.phoenix-fly.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base515 0 #21 December 20, 2003 QuoteQuoteBASE enviroment (i.e. mud, water, dust, sand, etc getting ground into the slink upon landing in a sketchy landing area) ? Seems like an amount of dirt/water being grinded into the slink over a period of time would decrease the integrity. Unless you are in the habit of faceplanting every landing and laying your gear out on the ground and walking all over it, how is dirt/sand or whatever going to get grinded into the slinks? They hang down level with your midsection on landing(on standups) and never touch the ground. When packing outdoors, use a tarp or find some grass or something. Pulling them toward the tailpocket doesn't grind anything into them. The worse thing you could do to harm them is leave them exposed to sunlight. I've packed them outdoors in sandy scrub land and have had them wet from water landinds. They still look new after a couple of hundreds of jumps. Treat them with the same care you should be treating the rest of your gear with and you shouldn't have any worries over wear. I give them a quick look-over as I pack and other than that they proven to be virtually maintainence free. later Mike May we live long and die out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TomAiello 25 #22 December 20, 2003 QuoteJust out of curiousity, does anybody know how much testing PD did on their reserve slinks where they similated something you might run across in a BASE enviroment (i.e. mud, water, dust, sand, etc getting ground into the slink upon landing in a sketchy landing area) ? Probably very little. There's not much need for that kind of testing on something that goes into a reserve.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites robibird 2 #23 December 20, 2003 PD and others test this..... I believe enough to get approval. What you think how many jumpers / riggers / skydivers knows for how much, or how tight links has to be screwed in in order to hold good grip, but not to brake under the pressure. Believe me many people think ''more tight is better'' Well.... Personally I saw 5 cases were link blow up after being tight to much ( in skydiving though ] . AhojRobert Pecnik [email protected] www.phoenix-fly.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites andrewstewart 0 #24 December 21, 2003 Quote Cooler (and better) things are coming . . . A canopy that can fly backwards? That'd be nice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TomAiello 25 #25 December 21, 2003 QuoteA canopy that can fly backwards? That'd be nice. I know several people who are working on that. In theory, if you put airlocks on the front of a canopy, and valved secondary inlets on the bottom skin (and perhaps airlocks on the tail, as well), you ought to be able to create a canopy that can "slip" backward (in the same way a round moves when you pull a side down to spill air) without deflating. I agree with Nick. Cooler--and safer--things are on the way.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 0 Go To Topic Listing
riggersam 0 #9 December 19, 2003 Do you ever take the slider off, or do you just tie it down? How particular are you about where you land/pack? In the environments that I find myself in, I don't think it would be a good option. I don't have a dedicated slider-up rig and a dedicate slider-off rig, so find myself switching it back and forth a fair amount. Just considering the possible effects of dirt, dust, water and rocks on a slink and I quickly find myself a lot more comfortable working with a metal link. Then again, maybe I just like being able to take a wrench to my rig... Mark Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base515 0 #10 December 20, 2003 I leave my sliders on and tie them down on slider down jumps. I think taking it off and on is waste of time. You open yourself up for rigging errors, by taking it off and on. I go from slider up to slider down all the the time, and simply run some short pieces of old line through the riser opening at the slink to tie it off with. It hasn't shown any wear on the riser or slink from tying it off this way. Having it tied on also gives you a cross-link in case one riser fails. I 've jump into water with them and have jumped a lot in sandy areas near our coast. I haven'y noticed any wear on th slinks from them. Treat them just like your lines, don't pack where you will thrash your lines and your slinks will be fine. I've packed outdoors in the grass many times and it seemed fine. i think the worst situtation is some of the packing tarps at some of the dz's near the coast. They get covered in light sand and grind into your lines against the nylon of the tarp. Just brush the area clear or use a packing mat. Quite frankly my lines are looking worse for the wear than the slinks are and they were new at about the same time. They work great for me in my enviroment, but like I said i leave my slider on at all times. If you have to take it off and on, it might be easier to use metal links. They're simple and work great in my opinion.(slinks that is) peace Mike May we live long and die out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rfarris 1 #11 December 20, 2003 Quote I have about 250 to 300 jumps on them now. Are you saying you have 250 to 300 jumps on the original set of Slinks on each rig? If not, how often do you replace them. QuoteI started using them because.......They are stronger....... Has this been tested and published in the BASE environment? And if so, why aren't they standard on rigs just like the wide risers, opposed to the mini risers, which seem to have been proven inferior? I ask this because of your disclaimer statement at the end of your post. I'm just curious. Thanks Rod Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base515 0 #12 December 20, 2003 250+ divided between two sets of slinks. About evenly split. Pd Reserve slinks have been proved to be stronger than #5 metal links which are the standerd on BASE rigs. The disclaimer is for just stating my opinion. I'll probabily change them the same time I would get new lines, though the lines are wearing at a higher rate. The slinks are still in great shape. They don't see much sunlight in my neck of the woods and haven't been too abused packing outdoors. In the chain of gear that saves my life, they seem to be a very strong link. No slider bumpers also removes a link that can and has caused malfunctions. There was a post by Adam from CR, stating the advantages and disadvantages of slinks from his point of view. i don't know how to copy that link over to here though. May we live long and die out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #13 December 20, 2003 QuoteThere was a post by Adam from CR, stating the advantages and disadvantages of slinks from his point of view. i don't know how to copy that link over to here though. Here you go.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
andy2 0 #14 December 20, 2003 [QUOTE]Pd Reserve slinks have been proved to be stronger than #5 metal links which are the standerd on BASE rigs[/QUOTE] Just out of curiousity, does anybody know how much testing PD did on their reserve slinks where they similated something you might run across in a BASE enviroment (i.e. mud, water, dust, sand, etc getting ground into the slink upon landing in a sketchy landing area) ? Seems like an amount of dirt/water being grinded into the slink over a period of time would decrease the integrity. --------------------------------------------- let my inspiration flow, in token rhyme suggesting rhythm... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ernokaikkonen 0 #15 December 20, 2003 Quote I've also got a nice 3-ring modification that would eliminate hard pulls during line twists, but that design is still being worked on in CAD. I thought riser-inserts work pretty well for that? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NickDG 23 #16 December 20, 2003 >Slinks, microlines, small risers, smaller canopies... >Well, why not one day!! >Keeping stubborn approach is not good and it >doesn't contributing developing in any area. GOING BACKWARDS . . . Bringing a bunch of cheesy skydiving stuff to BASE jumping isn’t innovative. In fact, it should be the other way around, if skydivers used stronger, cleaner, less complicated gear not so many of them would be dying. Making gear smaller and lighter is all skydiving manufactures can do before they have to re-write the manuals, and in the case of TSO’d gear, go through the whole rigmarole, and spend the money, in the FAA shake and bake process. BASE riggers and manufactures are not so encumbered and have always been free to dream, cut, and sew in the afternoon and then just go try it later that night. One of the reasons you are so comfortable jumping a single canopy system right now is we (not me in particular) figured out a long time ago if you build BASE gear to be simpler to use, cleaner in design, and let the function follow the form, then you just did away with about 99 reasons why you need a reserve in the first place. In addition, the one canopy you are BASE jumping is so tough you can hang a truck on it. Sure, I’ll take a chance and jump my Stiletto once or twice without a reserve, when I’m getting paid for it. On the other hand I’ll fun-a-way to my skydiving seven cell reserve because I know between me and my knife, no matter what happens, I’ll most likely have something landable at the end. Once you go smaller (and less docile) and then break a line, split a seam, or blow a rib it’s a whole new design and you are the test pilot. Plus BASE canopies still get stashed in the bushes and slammed in car doors and trunks. There aren’t that many manicured lawns in the BASE world. Over the years I’ve been lucky enough to be around some of the brightest minds in gear manufacturing and believe me, you can’t say they aren’t innovative. In fact, we owe them a debt of gratitude for what they didn’t bring to market. I remember Todd came up to me once and said, hey Nick, look at this, and then after he explained it to me, I was floored, this was it, this is the answer, and he smiled and said, “not for a few years yet, buddy, keep it to yourself.” Cooler (and better) things are coming . . . NickBASE 194 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NickDG 23 #17 December 20, 2003 >where the silicone slider bumper came off on deplyoment and slid up the lines and choked off the slider as it was coming down. This resulted in a cutaway and reserve deployment.< Gee, run a needle and some waxed cord around the slider bumper and the connector link . . . Hello? Nick BASE 194 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faber 0 #18 December 20, 2003 Quote#5 metal links a freind of mine who is skydiver,but built tools all day long actualy has qustioniesed our metal links.He think we use to small rills(sorry word,the one around that secure/close the link)thinking of what normaly demands are out side skywold.His consern were that we could even blow a metal link(i saw 3(2 from same canopy opening)which were blown in a regular skydive(RW jump).A concerne to think of,in BASE it would be a fatality for sure... im not a brain in such,i just wanted to pass the info/consern i talked about whith a guy who is experiened in tool making and skydiving. He recoment to buy metal links were thouse rills(again) are 1/3 of the linkas a minimum. personaly i use slinks at my skydive gear,unless some one buys it soon,and metal links at both my BASE rigs Stay safe Stefan Faber Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base515 0 #19 December 20, 2003 Gee, run a needle and some waxed cord around the slider bumper and the connector link . . Quote or use slinks and remove 2 extra links in the gear chain. Bumpers,waxed line,needle.. all this extra stuff and time to install and or remove, just to make an inferior piece of metal acceptable for use? Doesn't that just sound wrong? Mike May we live long and die out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites robibird 2 #20 December 20, 2003 GOING BACKWARDS . . . Bringing a bunch of cheesy skydiving stuff to BASE jumping isn't innovative. In fact, it should be the other way around, if skydivers used stronger, cleaner, less complicated gear not so many of them would be dying. Making gear smaller and lighter is all skydiving manufactures can do before they have to re-write the manuals, and in the case of TSO'd gear, go through the whole rigmarole, and spend the money, in the FAA shake and bake process. _________________________________________________ OK, so you say that skydiving community has to follow the BASE manufactures. Well, this is very interesting statement. If this would be the case, trough all this years we would still be jumping Strato-Clouds, Stratostar and other ''state of the art'' ram-air canopies, and for many years. Please explain me what is complicated in skydiving equipment?! TSO and other papers, '' law hassle'', etc. are here not because skydivers want them, it because of the overall legal system (and related aviation and skydiving regulations) most countries have. Luckily BASE manufacturers do not have to deal with that, and if they would they would not exist at all. Do not forget that BASE manufacturers actually benefited because skydiving equipment manufacturers learned how to meet those standards with the technology that is advancing every day. And don't forget that those standards and regulations are primarily dealing with safety issues of those people using that equipment. Also, have in mind that most of technology and know-how for skydiving equipment was simply transferred to the BASE equipment production. And thanks to that, all BASE equipment can easily comply with standards for skydiving equipment. _________________________________________________ BASE riggers and manufactures are not so encumbered and have always been free to dream, cut, and sew in the afternoon and then just go try it later that night. One of the reasons you are so comfortable jumping a single canopy system right now is we (not me in particular) figured out a long time ago if you build BASE gear to be simpler to use, cleaner in design, and let the function follow the form, then you just did away with about 99 reasons why you need a reserve in the first place. ______________________________________________ IMHO, BASE jumpers and riggers were those people who had passion and were brave enough to try to jump low object and smart enough to adjust their SKYDIVING gear in such way to survive the jump. With time, number of those people started to grow and only then those who had abilities and knowledge started with modifications of existing skydiving equipment, and finally, with production of BASE equipment. Actually, BASE was almost never a separate sport or activity; it had always kept close relations with skydiving. BASE jumping canopies (now talking about canopies) started to change recently, in last 5 years or so, pretty much because of competition among BASE manufactures and drastically increased interest in BASE. Five years ago it was absolutely normal to see some Pegasus, Ravens or similar 7 cell canopies. Nowadays this is considered as unacceptable, right? If you look to the BASE canopy in particular, you'll see that there were no major improvements in airfoils or shapes. I don't think that we have already found the best airfoil, shape or and best materials. Reasons are, IMHO, lack of money, small market and very, very conservative approach to BASE activities. I agree, it has to be a bit conservative, but to be strongly against some everything new that is coming in to the sport.... ? _______________________________________________ In addition, the one canopy you are BASE jumping is so tough you can hang a truck on it. Sure, I'll take a chance and jump my Stiletto once or twice without a reserve, when I'm getting paid for it. On the other hand I'll fun-a-way to my skydiving seven cell reserve because I know between me and my knife, no matter what happens, I'll most likely have something landable at the end. _______________________________________________ Well, we have trucks of different sizes, don't we? Standards, which skydiving equipment has to meet, are well known and as long as the new stuff does not meet those standards, specific canopy or rig will not be ready for sale. These are the reasons why I think that discussion about how strong something should be is completely irrelevant. It is all about technology and, for instance type of fold, strength of used materials, reinforcing systems and load distribution. I think that 99% of the new jumpers who came to the sport in last two years would refuse to jump some Ravens or Pegasus, even though those canopies were the best at their time and were able to hold the truck too. _________________________________________________ Once you go smaller (and less docile) and then break a line, split a seam, or blow a rib it's a whole new design and you are the test pilot. Plus BASE canopies still get stashed in the bushes and slammed in car doors and trunks. There aren't that many manicured lawns in the BASE world. Over the years I've been lucky enough to be around some of the brightest minds in gear manufacturing and believe me, you can't say they aren't innovative. In fact, we owe them a debt of gratitude for what they didn't bring to market. I remember Todd came up to me once and said, hey Nick, look at this, and then after he explained it to me, I was floored, this was it, this is the answer, and he smiled and said, not for a few years yet, buddy, keep it to yourself. _________________________________________________ Agree, I never said anything against those people. In contrary, they have and will always have my support. I can only applaud to those who invented the tail gate, multi, V-tec, MDV or Vented PC or many other things, but I am all for let people be creative and explore the limit. Why should we not try to introduce some performance of modern skydiving canopies in BASE? If we can do that with same or even increased safety level, BASE could only benefit from that. __________________________________________________ Cooler (and better) things are coming . . . ________________________________________________ Yes they are coming , but not from the Mars.... Regards RobibirdRobert Pecnik [email protected] www.phoenix-fly.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites base515 0 #21 December 20, 2003 QuoteQuoteBASE enviroment (i.e. mud, water, dust, sand, etc getting ground into the slink upon landing in a sketchy landing area) ? Seems like an amount of dirt/water being grinded into the slink over a period of time would decrease the integrity. Unless you are in the habit of faceplanting every landing and laying your gear out on the ground and walking all over it, how is dirt/sand or whatever going to get grinded into the slinks? They hang down level with your midsection on landing(on standups) and never touch the ground. When packing outdoors, use a tarp or find some grass or something. Pulling them toward the tailpocket doesn't grind anything into them. The worse thing you could do to harm them is leave them exposed to sunlight. I've packed them outdoors in sandy scrub land and have had them wet from water landinds. They still look new after a couple of hundreds of jumps. Treat them with the same care you should be treating the rest of your gear with and you shouldn't have any worries over wear. I give them a quick look-over as I pack and other than that they proven to be virtually maintainence free. later Mike May we live long and die out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TomAiello 25 #22 December 20, 2003 QuoteJust out of curiousity, does anybody know how much testing PD did on their reserve slinks where they similated something you might run across in a BASE enviroment (i.e. mud, water, dust, sand, etc getting ground into the slink upon landing in a sketchy landing area) ? Probably very little. There's not much need for that kind of testing on something that goes into a reserve.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites robibird 2 #23 December 20, 2003 PD and others test this..... I believe enough to get approval. What you think how many jumpers / riggers / skydivers knows for how much, or how tight links has to be screwed in in order to hold good grip, but not to brake under the pressure. Believe me many people think ''more tight is better'' Well.... Personally I saw 5 cases were link blow up after being tight to much ( in skydiving though ] . AhojRobert Pecnik [email protected] www.phoenix-fly.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites andrewstewart 0 #24 December 21, 2003 Quote Cooler (and better) things are coming . . . A canopy that can fly backwards? That'd be nice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TomAiello 25 #25 December 21, 2003 QuoteA canopy that can fly backwards? That'd be nice. I know several people who are working on that. In theory, if you put airlocks on the front of a canopy, and valved secondary inlets on the bottom skin (and perhaps airlocks on the tail, as well), you ought to be able to create a canopy that can "slip" backward (in the same way a round moves when you pull a side down to spill air) without deflating. I agree with Nick. Cooler--and safer--things are on the way.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 0 Go To Topic Listing
robibird 2 #20 December 20, 2003 GOING BACKWARDS . . . Bringing a bunch of cheesy skydiving stuff to BASE jumping isn't innovative. In fact, it should be the other way around, if skydivers used stronger, cleaner, less complicated gear not so many of them would be dying. Making gear smaller and lighter is all skydiving manufactures can do before they have to re-write the manuals, and in the case of TSO'd gear, go through the whole rigmarole, and spend the money, in the FAA shake and bake process. _________________________________________________ OK, so you say that skydiving community has to follow the BASE manufactures. Well, this is very interesting statement. If this would be the case, trough all this years we would still be jumping Strato-Clouds, Stratostar and other ''state of the art'' ram-air canopies, and for many years. Please explain me what is complicated in skydiving equipment?! TSO and other papers, '' law hassle'', etc. are here not because skydivers want them, it because of the overall legal system (and related aviation and skydiving regulations) most countries have. Luckily BASE manufacturers do not have to deal with that, and if they would they would not exist at all. Do not forget that BASE manufacturers actually benefited because skydiving equipment manufacturers learned how to meet those standards with the technology that is advancing every day. And don't forget that those standards and regulations are primarily dealing with safety issues of those people using that equipment. Also, have in mind that most of technology and know-how for skydiving equipment was simply transferred to the BASE equipment production. And thanks to that, all BASE equipment can easily comply with standards for skydiving equipment. _________________________________________________ BASE riggers and manufactures are not so encumbered and have always been free to dream, cut, and sew in the afternoon and then just go try it later that night. One of the reasons you are so comfortable jumping a single canopy system right now is we (not me in particular) figured out a long time ago if you build BASE gear to be simpler to use, cleaner in design, and let the function follow the form, then you just did away with about 99 reasons why you need a reserve in the first place. ______________________________________________ IMHO, BASE jumpers and riggers were those people who had passion and were brave enough to try to jump low object and smart enough to adjust their SKYDIVING gear in such way to survive the jump. With time, number of those people started to grow and only then those who had abilities and knowledge started with modifications of existing skydiving equipment, and finally, with production of BASE equipment. Actually, BASE was almost never a separate sport or activity; it had always kept close relations with skydiving. BASE jumping canopies (now talking about canopies) started to change recently, in last 5 years or so, pretty much because of competition among BASE manufactures and drastically increased interest in BASE. Five years ago it was absolutely normal to see some Pegasus, Ravens or similar 7 cell canopies. Nowadays this is considered as unacceptable, right? If you look to the BASE canopy in particular, you'll see that there were no major improvements in airfoils or shapes. I don't think that we have already found the best airfoil, shape or and best materials. Reasons are, IMHO, lack of money, small market and very, very conservative approach to BASE activities. I agree, it has to be a bit conservative, but to be strongly against some everything new that is coming in to the sport.... ? _______________________________________________ In addition, the one canopy you are BASE jumping is so tough you can hang a truck on it. Sure, I'll take a chance and jump my Stiletto once or twice without a reserve, when I'm getting paid for it. On the other hand I'll fun-a-way to my skydiving seven cell reserve because I know between me and my knife, no matter what happens, I'll most likely have something landable at the end. _______________________________________________ Well, we have trucks of different sizes, don't we? Standards, which skydiving equipment has to meet, are well known and as long as the new stuff does not meet those standards, specific canopy or rig will not be ready for sale. These are the reasons why I think that discussion about how strong something should be is completely irrelevant. It is all about technology and, for instance type of fold, strength of used materials, reinforcing systems and load distribution. I think that 99% of the new jumpers who came to the sport in last two years would refuse to jump some Ravens or Pegasus, even though those canopies were the best at their time and were able to hold the truck too. _________________________________________________ Once you go smaller (and less docile) and then break a line, split a seam, or blow a rib it's a whole new design and you are the test pilot. Plus BASE canopies still get stashed in the bushes and slammed in car doors and trunks. There aren't that many manicured lawns in the BASE world. Over the years I've been lucky enough to be around some of the brightest minds in gear manufacturing and believe me, you can't say they aren't innovative. In fact, we owe them a debt of gratitude for what they didn't bring to market. I remember Todd came up to me once and said, hey Nick, look at this, and then after he explained it to me, I was floored, this was it, this is the answer, and he smiled and said, not for a few years yet, buddy, keep it to yourself. _________________________________________________ Agree, I never said anything against those people. In contrary, they have and will always have my support. I can only applaud to those who invented the tail gate, multi, V-tec, MDV or Vented PC or many other things, but I am all for let people be creative and explore the limit. Why should we not try to introduce some performance of modern skydiving canopies in BASE? If we can do that with same or even increased safety level, BASE could only benefit from that. __________________________________________________ Cooler (and better) things are coming . . . ________________________________________________ Yes they are coming , but not from the Mars.... Regards RobibirdRobert Pecnik [email protected] www.phoenix-fly.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base515 0 #21 December 20, 2003 QuoteQuoteBASE enviroment (i.e. mud, water, dust, sand, etc getting ground into the slink upon landing in a sketchy landing area) ? Seems like an amount of dirt/water being grinded into the slink over a period of time would decrease the integrity. Unless you are in the habit of faceplanting every landing and laying your gear out on the ground and walking all over it, how is dirt/sand or whatever going to get grinded into the slinks? They hang down level with your midsection on landing(on standups) and never touch the ground. When packing outdoors, use a tarp or find some grass or something. Pulling them toward the tailpocket doesn't grind anything into them. The worse thing you could do to harm them is leave them exposed to sunlight. I've packed them outdoors in sandy scrub land and have had them wet from water landinds. They still look new after a couple of hundreds of jumps. Treat them with the same care you should be treating the rest of your gear with and you shouldn't have any worries over wear. I give them a quick look-over as I pack and other than that they proven to be virtually maintainence free. later Mike May we live long and die out Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TomAiello 25 #22 December 20, 2003 QuoteJust out of curiousity, does anybody know how much testing PD did on their reserve slinks where they similated something you might run across in a BASE enviroment (i.e. mud, water, dust, sand, etc getting ground into the slink upon landing in a sketchy landing area) ? Probably very little. There's not much need for that kind of testing on something that goes into a reserve.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites robibird 2 #23 December 20, 2003 PD and others test this..... I believe enough to get approval. What you think how many jumpers / riggers / skydivers knows for how much, or how tight links has to be screwed in in order to hold good grip, but not to brake under the pressure. Believe me many people think ''more tight is better'' Well.... Personally I saw 5 cases were link blow up after being tight to much ( in skydiving though ] . AhojRobert Pecnik [email protected] www.phoenix-fly.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites andrewstewart 0 #24 December 21, 2003 Quote Cooler (and better) things are coming . . . A canopy that can fly backwards? That'd be nice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TomAiello 25 #25 December 21, 2003 QuoteA canopy that can fly backwards? That'd be nice. I know several people who are working on that. In theory, if you put airlocks on the front of a canopy, and valved secondary inlets on the bottom skin (and perhaps airlocks on the tail, as well), you ought to be able to create a canopy that can "slip" backward (in the same way a round moves when you pull a side down to spill air) without deflating. I agree with Nick. Cooler--and safer--things are on the way.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 Next Page 1 of 2 0
TomAiello 25 #22 December 20, 2003 QuoteJust out of curiousity, does anybody know how much testing PD did on their reserve slinks where they similated something you might run across in a BASE enviroment (i.e. mud, water, dust, sand, etc getting ground into the slink upon landing in a sketchy landing area) ? Probably very little. There's not much need for that kind of testing on something that goes into a reserve.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
robibird 2 #23 December 20, 2003 PD and others test this..... I believe enough to get approval. What you think how many jumpers / riggers / skydivers knows for how much, or how tight links has to be screwed in in order to hold good grip, but not to brake under the pressure. Believe me many people think ''more tight is better'' Well.... Personally I saw 5 cases were link blow up after being tight to much ( in skydiving though ] . AhojRobert Pecnik [email protected] www.phoenix-fly.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
andrewstewart 0 #24 December 21, 2003 Quote Cooler (and better) things are coming . . . A canopy that can fly backwards? That'd be nice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 25 #25 December 21, 2003 QuoteA canopy that can fly backwards? That'd be nice. I know several people who are working on that. In theory, if you put airlocks on the front of a canopy, and valved secondary inlets on the bottom skin (and perhaps airlocks on the tail, as well), you ought to be able to create a canopy that can "slip" backward (in the same way a round moves when you pull a side down to spill air) without deflating. I agree with Nick. Cooler--and safer--things are on the way.-- Tom Aiello [email protected] SnakeRiverBASE.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
