20 year old reserve

[jdthomas 0]

Wendy at no point did I even begin to say that a diaper would be bad, I don't know how you could come up with that.

I was told by my instructor during my training this style diaper affectionally called a "death diaper" was of a poor design, few where made as it was a quickly found to fail.

What differentitaes was how the bands stowed and locked the lines into place. the bottom band would not unlock if stowed incorrectly and this was easily accomplished mistake I guess.

If you want more info I can contact my former instructor and get that for you. just pm me with the request.

www.greenboxphotography.com

[bjornufknu 0]

In Sweden you are NOT ALLOWED to jump with a reserve that is older than 20 years. Maybe there is a reason for us having this rule? If I were you, I would really think about buying a new (or a newer used) reserve. They aren´t expensive if you think about the hole "saving your life" issue...

d.d.s.

[murrays 0]

My first reserve ride in 1981 was on a 26' diaper-less Navy Conical that was 29 years old.

I don't believe that a reserve should be retired because of its age but because of its condition. One of the rigs I'm jumping has an 18 year old reserve...doesn't worry me a bit. I think that setting "expiry dates" on reserves is being a little too paranoid.

X-210 reserve....I don't know what the reserve flew like but I wasn't impressed with the X210 main model on the few jumps I made on one.

--
Murray

"No tyranny is so irksome as petty tyranny: the officious demands of policemen, government clerks, and electromechanical gadgets." - Edward Abbey

[wmw999 2,148]

Quote

Wendy at no point did I even begin to say that a diaper would be bad, I don't know how you could come up with that.

That's why the first part of the post was to ask if there was a difference between death diapers and others -- there's a distinct possibility I haven't heard of everything.

Really. I was more curious -- the number of round reserves out there doesn't really warrant learning about all the varieties extensively any more.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[sducoach 0]

For those who have owned, packed, and used them, we understand.

I'm sure the term came from one of the "instructors" at Joe's riggers class.

I'm often amazed at the comments and opinions form experts that have no knowledge of, or have seen the equipment in question. Especially non-riggers.

Education, education, education...

Blues,

J.E.

James 4:8

[riggerrob 558]

Quote

My first reserve ride in 1981 was on a 26' diaper-less Navy Conical that was 29 years old.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Hee! Hee!

Reminds me of my first reserve ride in 1979. It was on a non-diapered, non-4-line-release, non-steerable 24' flat army surplus reserve. It may have been an ugly off-white, but it flew far better than the Crossbow I had expected to land.

My next job on my personal gear is to update my Vector I to Vector II standard and repack my 1985-vintage square reserve. It has been repacked a bunch of times, but never deployed.

Twenty years is not a rigid deadline for grounding gear. Number of jumps and condition are far more important guidelines.

• Quote

[slug 1]

Quote

A good start:
http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=254628#254628

Damn I jump a 5 cell swift, used it a couple of times, nice standups.
When we got the urge again we took the reserve to the rigger for a repack they declined because it was "to old".

When I asked why she explained the wear & tear from packing on carpet etc. News to me times changed. We asked the rigger to check out the packing card. Ok no problem they packed it.

We were jumping in Florida on holiday and a guy asks what I'm jumping for a reserve?

SwiftDude you need to get a PD reserve that swift 5 cell is only half a parachute.
LMAO.

"Back in the day" the military used to have a seven year shelf life for their gear. After they surplused it some of them would get into the sport market and they work as designed (except for the sleeve) for a long time.

The surplus reserve's saved a lot of lives. They weren't very steerable (4 line release) and had minimum forward speed so they had their limits due to wind conditions.

It's been 2 yr's since my rig has been sitting in my closet but if and when I decide to jump again I expect we'll be able to find a qualified rigger who will pack it based on their experience or we'll find a qualified pencil..

The gear failures and recalls seem to have increased over the last X yrs in spite of meeting all FAA testing requirements. .

R.I.P.

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

okay folks...............got all the info.......

MAKE---GQ

MODEL--X-210

rigger said reserve chute is fine...BUT....the pilot chute is weak and the main risers are not airworthy.

I guess bf needs to think about safety and quite being stubborn

skygirl1

Your rigger is wrong. GQ has a 15 year life on thier canopies.
The manual contains this statement. Chapter 2, page 1, line 2.1 under “Maintenance Notes”

"The life of the assembly is 15 years from the date of manufacture subject to a critical inspection at 10 years".
Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[dkf1979 0]

Sell to an antique store!!! Then buy new!!

http://bodypilot.bounceme.net

[slug 1]

Quote

Sell to an antique store!!! Then buy new!!

Quote

Hi Mjosparky

Nice websight btw



Instead of selling the 20 yr old reserve to a antique store how about donateing it to the PIA for some drop tests ot tests jumps. to see wether it can pass the FAA requirements for reserves?

Nope that won't work there could be a appearence of a conflict of interests (like the tobacco co's and the health effects of smoking)

Then there's the USPA who represents the interests of the skydivers but I don't think thats going to work either. There to busy, understaffed and underfunded.

Anyone know of any objective data that proves that a properly manufactored and maintained 20 yr old Sq reserve will not work?
R.I.P.

• Quote

[wmw999 2,148]

Quote

Anyone know of any objective data that proves that a properly manufactored and maintained 20 yr old Sq reserve will not work?

No, but I have about 50 jumps' worth of objective evidence that a 20+ yr old Sq. main will work. It already had a couple hundred jumps, so maybe being broken in helps

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

Hi Mjosparky

Nice websight btw

Was you post the voice of experience? or the widom of youth?

Slug,
Not sure what your reply means. I do not have a web site and my post was not "voice of experience" but a quote from the GQ manual.
Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[slug 1]

Sorry Mjosparky

Damn computers, me bad

I was responding to DKF 1979 that had responded to your post.

Getting Mjo & DKF confused is not good. But the guy does have a nice websight

What do you think about having a unbiased group testing some of these 20 year old reserves that no one wants to pack to see it they meet FAA test drop requirements for new reserves.

I realize there is some expense involved but that is why USPA member pay dues, to keep jumpers jumping
BTW I'm not a rigger, and can understand the riggers reluctance to go against manufactor's directive's when putting their name on the line.

I'm just wondering what these 15-20 year time limit's are based on? WAG or objective real world tests.

IMO The acid mesh problem was a manufactoring defect, and should have been taken care of by the reserve manufactor, rather than requiring the riggers to test every reserve to verify if there was a problem with the reserve and then put their name on the line if there wasn't.

My rigger tested my reserve by the weight method and it failed sent it back to the factory who retested it and sent it back and said it passed.

R.I.P.

[mjosparky 3]

Slug,
Glad you cleared that up, I thought maybe I was having a senior moment.
I am unbiased and happen to have been involved in canopy/system testing for over 20 years. I just don't think the risk/cost factor could be justified considering the relative small target group. At the end of a comprehensive test program you would have used up most of the canopies referred to in the test matrix.
It is not a riggers reluctance to go against the manufacture's directives, the FAA requires that the manufacture's directives, recommendation, ect. are followed when packing a reserve/emergency system.
When you consider the importance of a reserve canopy, 15/20 years is a long time. Trying to stretch the limit is foolish. imo
Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[tbrown 26]

In the early 1980's, the TSO C-23 revision finally rolled brom Rev B to Rev C. Nowadays it's rolled again to Rev D. If I recall, Skydiving Magazine reported back in the 80's that not only did most round reserves fail the newer and tougher test under Rev C, but some of the square reserves currently on the market as well. Those canopies were "grandfathered", insofar as they could be used only with Rev B approved harness/container systems. You were not allowed to pack a Rev B reserve into a Rev C container, not a Rev C reserve into a Rev B container. Now 20 years later, reserves and systems approved under Rev C are still widely in use, while the newest stuff is Rev D approved (tougher still - up to 300 lbs).

So why on earth use a reserve so old that it may have failed test standards twenty friggin' years ago ? I mean if you want to save a few bucks, buy a Strato Star for $30, but your reserve ??? I'm not a rigger, but I am a QA Inspector in the aerospace industry and I know what a stamp means. It means civil and/or criminal liability for messing up.

There are zillions of good reserves less than 5 years old. Hell, you can get a brand spanking new Smart reserve (Rev D approved) online for as little as $764. You're bf's life has to be worth that much, doesn't it ?

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[chuteless 1]

I dont know if I can contribute anything to this thread, but I'll give you some info that may help you make a decision.

I have 1000+ hours of flying hot air balloons, and they are made of the same type of material (zero porosity ripstop) as is available for making parachutes. I believe the balloon ripstop may be a little heavier than today's parachutes, but there was no difference back in the 1980s-1990s.

Balloon ripstop is subject to as much as 15 million BTUs of heat, and must be inspected once a year for wear, tear, and existing tensile strength.

Sometimes (usually after 5 or 10 years) the balloon usually gets new top panels, but the side panels are considered okay as long as they are not torn.

The few times a reserve is used, and even the repeat openings of a main, is never as hard on the fabric as 15 million BTUs on repeated flights.

I know people who have flown balloons for 10 years with the same material as they started their flights, and I see no reason not to jump a reserve or main that has been taken care of. When repacking a reserve, it should be well aired and checked over...( in case it may have gotten wet and there is mildew) but that would indicate "not taking proper care of it.

Its just a little data on ripstop, and maybe it will help you.

Hope so

Bill Cole D-41

[PhreeZone 15]

Part of the issue is that reserves are made not from zero porsity, but ultra low poresity materials. Reserves are expected to have 2-4 cfm poresity new out of the bag and ballons don't see those numbers for hunderds of hours of usage.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[chuteless 1]

I suggest you contact a balloon manufacturer and a reserve manufacturer and compare the materials. Thats the first time I have heard a comparison of zero porosity and ultra low porosity.

????????????????????????????

WOW !

Bill Cole D-41

[PhreeZone 15]

http://www.cameronballoons.com/fabricpage.htm Cameron Balloons on their "Hyperlast" material.

http://www.perftex.com/exatachute_specs.htmExacta-Chute Specs. Material that PD, Precision and NA use in their reserves. Of note:
AIR PERMEABILITY
■ .5-3.5 CFM


http://www.perftex.com/soarcoat_specs.htmSoar-Coat® Specs. This is the material most commonly used as ZP mains and in a few balloon envelopes. Of Note:

AIR PERMEABILITY (max.)
■ 0 CFM
after 20 launderings
■ 0 CFM

Performance Textiles manufactors a lot of the materals in use in skydiving, and for some balloon ccopanies too.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[phoenixlpr 0]

IMHO theres a slite difference between a baloon and a reserve. A baloon is a subject of UV radiation and use. A reserve is packed most of the time and barely used.

[riggerrob 558]

You were not allowed to pack a Rev B reserve into a Rev C container, not a Rev C reserve into a Rev B container.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

If you want to get picky about the rules, you can legally pack a Low Speed TSO-C23B reserve into a modern TSO-C23D container, it just down-grades the entire system to the Low Speed category.
Fortunately this is not permanent, because as soon as you install a TSO-C23D reserve canopy, you upgdate the entire system to TSO-C23D.

In other words, the airspeed and weight limits on a parachute system are the airspeed and weight limits of the "slowest" component.

Mixing and matching TSOed components is a complex process best left to Master Riggers.

[chuteless 1]

You are quite right, and that is my point. If the ripstop material of a balloon can still have enough tensile strength to be considered airworthy after UV light and constant use in 15 million BTUs, how much longer then should a reserve last when packed, aired, and repacked/

I would say the reserve would almost last indefinitely.

I wont tell you the age of mine....or my mains


Bill Cole D-41

[stratostar 5]

I would agree with you, have a look at the gear in these photos, most, if not all the rigs were made
before some poster's were even born.
these photos are from 2001 and 2002, they all past
tensile and they are all airworthy, all this gear is jumped 5 to 10 times a year, some are in brand new
condition, but because it's 25 or 30 years old we shouldn't use it? get real.
if it's airworthy jump it, if it's not and won't pass the test's turn it into a car cover!
Maybe this why so many jumpers look at us "funny"
when we go to manifest....

stratostar

[chuteless 1]

thats classy lookin gear I must say. Looks better than that Dora the Exploer backpack of today LOL

If someone could find one of old twill 24ft reserves made in the 1040s or 1950s, I would wear it by itself (no other chute) and take it into terminal any day of the week.

Those were the chutes used in WW II..before ripstop was invented.

I know where there is a white cotton harness of WW II vintage...maybe I'll bring it to Rantoul in August.

Bill Cole D-41

[phoenixlpr 0]

You have missed something. Im on that side that gear should be retired if manufacturer say so. I would rather buy a new reserve after 20 years. I can buy any reserve, but I have one life only. I have 7 years in my reserve. I have one ride on it. Im going to retire and buy a new one if its time for that. It has saved my life once, I hope i dont have to use it again.