Reserve re-pack question

[Hooknswoop 19]

Riggers; anyone have a first-hand experience with a reserve that had a problem that happened after the previous rigger packed it? Something like AAD batteries leaking or something else that the owner was really glad that they got their reserve re-packed. Not anything caused by the previous rigger.

What was the problem and how would it have affected the reserve deployment?

Was the owner aware of the issue?

Derek

[councilman24 36]

Lets see, you've heard some of these before.

1.Reserve stuck to inside of freebag, 40lbs to pull bag off. Would have delayed low speed. Owner left rig in car all summer.

2. Failed tensile test on ram air reserve. May or may not have been landable upon deployment.

3. Failed tensile test on a round.

4. Partially interlocked PC spring. May have delayed deployment.

5. Lots and lots of broken internal strands on safety stows. Usually about every other or third pack job on a rig. I've never recognized them breaking while packing. So I think they give up the ghost during the cycle. Little probable effect.

6. Rag stuffed under pilot rig (strong) PC. Inhibited PC launch. Owner denied doing it but I don't know who else would have.

7. Lots of melted/deteriorated/broken rubber bands in the old days.

8. Strenth compromising (but probably not to failure) damage on reserve riser. First time I serviced it. Time of damage unknown, but probably manufacture or assembly by another. It could have happened during cycle also.

With the possible exception of 6 the owners didn't know.

You don't want to know about all the rigger errors. Or the serious main system issues found during reserve inspections and repacks. If your asking concerning 180 day cycle, the rigging errors and main defects should also count. The owner doesn't know about them either, even if he should and even if they're preventable.

I'm old for my age.
Terry Urban
D-8631
FAA DPRE

[nitrochute 2]

someone once brought me a reserve for a repack that had a hot knife dropped into it during its previous pack job.the seal was intact,and there was no damage to the container , so it couldn't have happened after the previous pack job. yes ,the owner became aware of the problem after he watched me inspect and then condemn the canopy(damage was extensive and would not have been survivable if deployed).the really sad part is after a reprimand from the faa , that rigger is still in N.J. packing

[sundevil777 93]

Quote

You don't want to know about all the rigger errors.

Do you think rigging errors are more or less likely if the reserve must be repacked more often? If done more often, there are more chances per year/lifetime for a rigger to make a mistake, but the user will not be exposed to the risk of having the "bad" pack job on their back for as long before it is redone.

So which is better?

This is a good site with some examples of rigging errors and user caused damage, click on "what your rigger sees"
http://www.noexcusesrigging.com/

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[teason 0]

It's been my experience that rigging errors come from lazy riggers. I see lots of uneven toggles which show an incomplete inspection.
I've also seen more butchered Racers than I care to remember. The worst was my own Racer Tandem. It had 50+ lbs of pull force on the reserve handle (even after the seal thread was removed), Broken quick loops, and Bent reserve pins. What really ticked me off is that we paid extra for the pack because the rigger didn't like to pack Racers.

If this rigger took the time to read the manual, he would not only of prevented the damage and unrealistic pull force but also would have seen how easy it is to pack the racer reserve.
He was lazy and charged us extra for his ignorance.

The more rigs I repack, the more bothered I become by lazy rigging.

By the way, your rigger is required to have the manufacturer's manual within reach for refferance!
And the only reason we have to repack a reserve is because we have to unpack it to INSPECT it.

20-30 min. repacks are a riggers way of ripping you off. You're paying for an inspection first and a repack last!
Lazy riggers are one of my hot buttons!

I would rather be a superb meteor, every atom of me in magnificent glow, than a sleepy and permanent planet.

[flyangel2 2]

Let's see, you just repacked my reserve for me the other day, and a friend of mine's reserve. Is there something you need to tell me?

May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey

[Hooknswoop 19]

LOL- no
I have found a lot more rigging errors than issues that came up since it was last packed, to the tune of 90%-10%.

I never re-packed my personal rig(s) just to look them over unless I thought there was something specific I was checking for.

I think that the wear and tear on reserves out-weighs the need to inspect the reserve every 120 days. Increasing the re-pack cycle would reduce this wear and tear. The down side is that the reserve is more likely to be used within a longer re-pack cycle and any rigging error would be more likely to become an issue. Also, maintenance that should get done would get delayed until the longer repack cycle due date. There would be more rigs being jumped in disrepair.

What would be nice is to allow an annual re-pack cycle on all-new rigs (AAD, reserve, container) until a rigger decided to shorten the re-pack cycle down to 180-days.

I would like to hear from riggers in countries with 180+ re-pack cycles how often and what issues they find that happened during the re-pack cycle.

There are a lot of unnecessary reserve re-packs happening every day. The re-pack cycle should reflect an amount of time a rig can go before use, storage, and abuse make an inspection and re-pack necessary, with a safety buffer in place.

There are a lot of factors that are revenant to when a reserve should be re-packed;

How is it stored?

How many jumps/month are put on it?

How well does the owner treat it?

It is jumped near salt water?

Is it jumped in a desert environment?

What humidity and temperature extremes is it subjected to?

How new is the gear?

What is the shortest life span of any component of the reserve?

Who packs the main?


A new rig that gets 10 jumps a month put on it in cool, dry, non-desert environment, packed indoors, stored properly and well taken care of can go a long time w/o needing a re-pack.

A rig jumped in a salt-air, hot, sandy environment, 100 jumps/month, dragged around and abused might not make it to 120 days before something needs repaired/retired. This type of (ab)use prevents the re-pack cycle from being extended for everyone.

I recently re-packed a pair of pilot bail out rigs that are used about once every 3 months (in a sweet P-51D Mustang) and stored properly when not in use. These rigs could easily go 2-years+ w/o needing a inspection and re-pack.

A system where the rigger can certify the rig for either 120, 180 or 365 days would be nice, nut there are drawbacks. Would the rigger charge the same amount for the same amount of work dependant on how long he signs it off for? Would the decision for how long to sign it off for be driven by money? What if a new rig that the owner treats well and gets signed off for 365 days gets sold to some that abuses the crap out of it? I don’t think such a system would work.

A research project to determine mean time between issues with a packed reserve should be done, and the re-pack cycle based up upon that. I would also like to see jumpers held accountable for determining the airworthiness of their gear, same as a pilot. If I pack a rig and sign it off and the jumper lands in salt water and leaves the rig in their trunk in 150-degree temps until dry, the rigger should be responsible for that reserve anymore. If an A & P repairs an airplane which then hits a deer on landing, the A & P is not responsible if the pilot then attempts to take off in a damage, un-airworthy aircraft. Jumpers taking better care of their gear would assist in the efforts to getting the re-pack cycle extended.

Derek

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

By the way, your rigger is required to have the manufacturer's manual within reach for refferance!
And the only reason we have to repack a reserve is because we have to unpack it to INSPECT it.

I&R on the data card stands for inspect and repack. Like you said, it means inspect and re-certify as air worthy. And that means everything, from the legstraps to the PC.
Michael

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[flyangel2 2]

That is good to know. Thanks.

For those of you wondering, I had just got a new Wings, and Sunshine Factory packed the reserve all up for me. Now, I'm not saying I don't trust the riggers out there, but I don't know them. So, I took my newly packed Wings to Hook to have him re-pack the reserve.

As Hook and Sparky will tell you, I don't just let anyone touch my gear.

May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

That is good to know. Thanks.

For those of you wondering, I had just got a new Wings, and Sunshine Factory packed the reserve all up for me. Now, I'm not saying I don't trust the riggers out there, but I don't know them. So, I took my newly packed Wings to Hook to have him re-pack the reserve.

As Hook and Sparky will tell you, I don't just let anyone touch my gear.

I like to touch your gear, even if the main loop is too short.
Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[betzilla 56]

I just had a Raven dash-m reserve come in, where SB 1221 had been done, but it was completely botched (needed sent to precision for them to remove and replace the line attachment tapes). The second set of bartacks was put right on top of the original ones -- basically just perforating already weak tabs even more, and increasing the likelihood of the tabs failing during reserve deployment.

The owner was pissed at first (the previous rigger had claimed to send the reserve to Precision to have the work done -- obviously not true), and initially refused to have more work done on it. Naturally, we refused to pack it, and even decided that it wouldn't leave our loft without being marked unairworthy unless she let us get the work done correctly.

But after being made to understand that her reserve had been weakened by the botched work, I believe the owner is very happy to have had it inspected here this time.

I'm proud of this catch, since I'm a pretty new rigger.
-B

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

The second set of bartacks was put right on top of the original ones -- basically just perforating already weak tabs even more, and increasing the likelihood of the tabs failing during reserve deployment.

It seems to me that no matter where you put the second bartack you will be adding more perforation to "already weak tabs".
I have sent 2 to Precision for the SB work and they both came back with just one bartack. But this time the single bartack was in Type I tape instead of Type III. I wonder what that could mean?
Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[sunshine 2]

Awesome catch Betsy. I guess when you learn from the best, you end up being a damn good rigger.

___________________________________________
meow

I get a Mike hug! I get a Mike hug!

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

I have sent 2 to Precision for the SB work and they both came back with just one bartack. But this time the single bartack was in Type I tape instead of Type III. I wonder what that could mean?

Has PA changed the SB? I still have a 109-M w/ the weak tape and 2 bar tacks.

Derek

[riggerrob 558]

No Precision has not changed the Service Bulletin.
There are two different ways to perform the Servic eBulletin. If the SB is done outside the factory, they merely add another bartack through the existing line attachment tape.
However, if you return a Raven Dash-M reserve to Precision, they remove the old line attachment tapes and replace them with stronger Type 1 tape.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Quote

No Precision has not changed the Service Bulletin.
There are two different ways to perform the Servic eBulletin. If the SB is done outside the factory, they merely add another bartack through the existing line attachment tape.
However, if you return a Raven Dash-M reserve to Precision, they remove the old line attachment tapes and replace them with stronger Type 1 tape.

Mine WAS done at the factory.

Derek

[betzilla 56]

Quote

It seems to me that no matter where you put the second bartack you will be adding more perforation to "already weak tabs".
I have sent 2 to Precision for the SB work and they both came back with just one bartack. But this time the single bartack was in Type I tape instead of Type III. I wonder what that could mean?

But more perforations right alongside the originals suck even more: check out how perforated paper with the holes closer together is easier to tear than with the holes far apart...

I'd be pretty happy with what Precision sent you. Kirk (the master rigger/DPRE here. also my fiance

[skymedic 0]

Mine was done at the factory too...and it has the two bartacks...WTF!!!!

Marc
otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman....

[riggerrob 558]

Two bartacks and Type 1 tape was the last production standard on Raven Dash-M reserves.

[Hooknswoop 19]

Type III tape is binding tape, pull up cord material. Tensile strength is 400 pounds for the 3/4 used by PA and ARE affected by the SB

Type I tape is herring-bone weave with a tensile strength of 500 pounds in the 9/16" width used by PA.

-M's manufactured from 3 OCT 96 to 12 Apr 99 used type I and one bar-tack.

-M's manufactured from 12 Apr 99 to 31 Oct 99 used type III and 2 tacks and are NOT affected by the SB

-M's manufactured from 1 Nov 99 to 26 Apr 00 used Type I with 2 bar tacks and are NOT affected by the SB

I had an affected -M and sent it in. It has the weaker, type III tape and, installed by that factory, 2 bar tacks. It was signed off as having compkied with the SB on the warning label by PA.

My question is then if PA changed from just adding a bar tack to replacing the Type III tape with Type I, why is my -M sitting here with Type III tape and 2 bar tacks?

Also, what about the -M's manufactured between 12 Apr 99 and 31 Oct 99? They have the weaker Type III tape and 2 bar tacks?

Wasn't there independant reserach showing that a second bar-tack didn't fix the problem of the tape ripping off the canopy on deployment?

I think I will add -M's with type III tape to my list of gear I won't pack, regardless if it has 1 or 2 bar tacks. I guess my -M goes in the trash.

Derek

[masterrigger1 2]

Quote

No Precision has not changed the Service Bulletin.
There are two different ways to perform the Servic eBulletin.

Quote

There are three ways to comply with the SB. The third was added not long after the SB came out.

MEL

Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC
www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[skymedic 0]

Mine is an affected reserve..mine was manufactured in 97...it originaly had type 3 with one bartack...it was sent back with type 3 and two bartacks...now I find out that if I had waited a bit longer I would have gotten the stronger type 1 for the same price. that is fucked up....I really will never buy or promote a precision product.

Marc
otherwise known as Mr.Fallinwoman....

[relyon 0]

Nice catch, but I believe you've come to some conclusions you don't have facts to back up.

Quote

The owner was pissed at first (the previous rigger had claimed to send the reserve to Precision to have the work done -- obviously not true), and initially refused to have more work done on it.

skymedic has a reserve that was sent to Precision and came back with type III and two bartacks. It's not so obvious that the reserve wasn't sent in. The work may have been botched by the factory.

Quote

Naturally, we refused to pack it, and even decided that it wouldn't leave our loft without being marked unairworthy unless she let us get the work done correctly.

How do you mark a reserve as unairworthy?

Bob

[masterrigger1 2]

How do you mark a reserve as unairworthy?

Quote

By drawing a circle with an "X" in the center on the data panel and then writting the info on the data card.

MEL

Skyworks Parachute Service, LLC
www.Skyworksparachuteservice.com

• Quote

[riddler 0]

Quote

It's not so obvious that the reserve wasn't sent in.

I think she was referring to the fact that the two bartacks were directly on top of each other, rather than one beneath the other. It's unlikely Precision would have made such a serious error.

I'm also curious about declaring it un-airworthy. Would you write on the reserve card that the rig is nor airworthy until full compliance with SB-1221? Edit - just saw the previous post, so never mind.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD